skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The "why" questions people ask about evolutionary biology are the carry over of theology into the understanding of evolution. People still need to believe there is a fundamental reason the world is the way it is. A similar theological carry over is the belief that we are better suited to the environment we evolved in. This is akin to "golden age" thinking, that the world today is somehow not right and if we return to the origin things will be better.

At a fundamental level causality doesn't even really make sense in evolutionary biology. You can ask the question "what benefits do this feature provide", but you can never really say that's why they evolved. In the end you have the traits you do because, at point in the species development, they didn't make you die faster and some helped you survive better, but it's not really possible to disentangle these.

Likewise people don't really understand that in evolutionary processes both the species and the environment are constantly changing. The notion that a species is "adapted for a particular environment" is somewhat nonsensical because "the environment" is never really fixed.
When my Prius's hybrid battery died, I swapped out the two bad cells (out of 28) for good ones. Cost of parts and labour: $300.
Next.js 15 Server Crash
Isn’t it more of sign of their troubles? I would suspect their wrappers are falling apart slowly…
Does this make gaming on the M4 Macs more viable now?
FFS... "Lots of writers, few readers". Read again and do the math: 2 seconds, multiply that by 10 million records which contain this, as well as "alarm installation in two locations" and a whole bunch of other crap with little to no repetition (<2%) and where does that get you? 2 * 10,000,000 = 20,000,000 SECONDS!!!! A day has 86,400 seconds (24 * 3600 = 86,400). The data pipeline needs to finish in <24 hours. Everyone needs to get this into their heads somehow: LLM's are not a silver bullet. They will not cure cancer anytime soon, nor will they be effective or cheap enough to run at massive scale. And I don't mean cheap as in "oh, just get openai subscription hurr durr". Throwing money mindlessly into something is never an effective way to solve a problem.
All of evolution is path dependent.

Dying after a sting does not have to confer extra fitness to exist, right now. rather it had to have conferred some fitness relative to the alternative traits circulating at the time it was selected. obviously if you go by gradient descent you are not guaranteed to reach a global minimum or even a local one, given a constantly changing fitness landscape.

In most of these discussions, optimizing nature of evolution is taken as granted - we do not need to prove how evolution works yet again - there are plenty of evidence and discussion elsewhere - take it or leave it.

This node is well connected to other knowledge, and if you disagree, you need to convince a whole discipline of science, not me.

From the optimizing premise of evolution, various inferred hypotheses can be made, explaining a range of phenomena, just like, in physics, from the premise that probabilities of events are given by the amplitudes of solutions of certain pdes with specific initial conditions, we were able to devise tractable mathematical models of various nuclear reactions, here a model of development of certain abstract traits was explained (“altruism”).

The author fully acknowledged that this is a simplified model and does not match reality in some cases, and in other cases does not explain well enough. improvements to the model were proposed.

Isn’t that how science works, in the best cases?
Snowden's work doesn't say anything on the matter. The information he released concerned government data collection, not data restriction or manipulation.
I had a loaner Ford Bronco Sport when I was having some maintenance on my hybrid. It had a 8 speed transmission and a turbo. Going from the super smooth eCTV to a vehicle that would jerk from shift changes/turbo when you just thought about touching the gas pedal has has put me off buying a vehicle with a normal transmission
True, but it tends to flow there organically. This comment was off topic from the start.
USA should ban the air, because the air is breathed by Chinese communists, the air is tainted with communism. The air could influence how American people think, could infect them with disease, cause people to be sick or death. This is a national security threat, USA government must ban the air.
One of the things I'm still struggling with when using LLMs over NLP is classification against a large corpus of data. If I get a new text and I want to find the most similar text out of a million others, semantically speaking, how would I do this with an LLM? Apart from choosing certain pre-defined categories (such as "friendly", "political", ...) and then letting the LLM rate each text on each category, I can't see a simple solution yet except using embeddings (which I think could just be done using BERT and does not count as LLM usage?).
Copyright violation is not speech.

Copying someone else's work and presenting it as your own is not protected speech, it is fraud. If you want to still consider this speech, someone is using it to actively and intentionally harm others.

If you're so intent on free speech, how would you feel if someone followed you around screaming profanities and abuse? Are you engaging in harmful and immoral censorship by calling the cops to remove this person? Are you suppressing his right to free speech by taking out a restraining order?
That "caring" a coop member has gets prioritized after addiction, health issues, family obligations, and so on.

You still need a mechanism for dealing with workers that e.g. just don't show up. You also need that mechanism for co-owners of an LLC, and so on.
In my opinion it's probably closer to real agi then it's not. I think the missing piece is learning after the pretraining phase.
I have been there. It was exceptionally dim/dark I couldn’t see anything. I know I was five feet away from the wall with a niche where Peter’s bones is.

The story was that the original church was built by Emperor Constantine on top of Peter’s tomb. When the basilica was built about a thousand years later. Peter’s bones were moved to its current location a few hundred yards away.

This video gives a glimpse of the jeweled box and Peter’s bones. https://youtu.be/DhnJgAzSHD8
What people fail to understand is that fake job postings pollute the pool and make real hiring impossible. We’re back to a referrals only job market.
Those are contradictory. Openai claim that you don't need a manual, since O1 performs best with simple prompts. The author claims it performs better with more complex prompts, but provides no evidence.
I actually prefer that over the usual revs going up and down depending on speed. I'm not American so my default before hybrids was driving stick. Never liked this steampunk-esque drama of moving from a standstill in such a car

Anyway revs do go up over a certain speed, but you need to be on the Autobahn to legally test it.
I’d much prefer to hear a car coming than not, personally.
Hmm, I understand this difference in genes differently.

You and I probably share 99% of effective genes, but still the difference in genes is much greater because there we are comparing the entire DNA. There is a lot of non-affecting DNA. And that is what they analyze when comparing DNA of two individuals in forensics.
It’s churn because every new model may or may not break strategies that worked before.

Nobody is designing how to prompt models. It’s an emergent property of these models, so they could just change entirely from each generation of any model.
> The notion that a species is "adapted for a particular environment" is somewhat nonsensical because "the environment" is never really fixed.

Mever considered this. Good stuff
I wouldn't put it past any company these days doing crawling in an aggressive manner to use proxy networks.
The Seven-Ages of Earth as Seen Through the Continental Lens
Well, there's a larger problem in the post. The primary reason that a bee dies when it stings you is that you kill the bee. A bee stinging an inanimate hunk of meat is unlikely to die.

But they can die, and yeah, a big part of the reason why is that dying isn't as large of a cost for bees as you might expect from a human perspective.

And looping back, another part is that given the very high risk of being intentionally killed when stinging an enemy who you want to sting, improving the much smaller rate of accidental death isn't really worth much. But even though it isn't worth much, it's worth something, and work has been done on the project.
As a counterpoint, living in a remote area, scheduling a ride 1h in advance is a lot better than not having a ride at all; that would be plenty to e.g. drop my car off at a mechanic / pick it up, without begging for rides.
I think it means a self-sufficient mind, which LLMs inherently are not.
This presumes that proto-bees had stingers that killed them before being super organisms, so that the obvious survival disadvantage that dying after a successful attack brings was compensated by the hive life rather than by surviving the sting.

I'm not at all sure this is true - I don't know the evolutionary history of bees, but it seems unlikely that some kind of solitary proto-bees would have died after a sting. And even if this were true, we should still wonder why that proto-bee evolved to have this suicide stinger in the first place.

"It's not a big disadvantage to survival" can't be the explanation for a trait, unless that trait is a remnant from an ancestor where it brought an advantage (like the hip bones in whales - hip bones are obviously useful in land-based mammals, and whales are descendants of those).

Sp the question is: why did some organism ever evolve a stinger that kills it, how was that ever something that made some organism survive better than its brethren that didn't have this trait?
I hated school. Probably did more harm than good. I remember feeling incredibly bored most of the time.
> To justify the $200/mo price tag, it just has to provide 1-2 Engineer hours a month

> Give a ton of context. Whatever you think I mean by a “ton” — 10x that.

One step forward. Two steps back.
The advice is wrong
Nothing new, just amplified by AI.

Companies inflate open roles to make themselves look more legit. A bonus is they can trawl for candidates and keep resumes in the back pocket. AI makes this easier so it can be done for less effort so more companies can do it.

If you want a real job that really exists, aim for intros to hiring managers.
Agreed, it's a disappointing and discrediting detour in an article that's about a fascinating topic. As you note, this has been worked out via haplodiploidy, which doesn't require venturing into theorizing about group selection or altruism.

And just to take a beat, and explain why group selection "triggers" people (in the author's wording), it's because it violates our fundamental, bedrock idea of causality which is no small thing, and anyone having a cavalier attitude about that probably doesn't belong in a room where these ideas are being deliberated. We understand physics to be causally closed, and expect "higher level" explanations to be compatible with the constraints of physics.

A model example in taking causality seriously, and proceeding with extreme care and extreme caution about challenging that intuition, I think is best exhibited in Quantum Mechanics, where, after excruciatingly careful examination of data and lots of hard thinking about implications, and lots of accounting for it's almost vulgar challenge to our intuitions, do we dare offer a model that challenges our basic idea of causation. That deviation is appropriately treated as profound, by contrast with the fast and loose invocation of group selection you find in some evolutionary explanations.
> LLMs are not feasible when you have a dataset of 10 million items that you need to classify relatively fast and at a reasonable cost.

What? That's simply not true.

Current embedding models are incredibly fast and cheap and will, in the vast majority of NLP tasks, get you far better results than any local set of features you can develop yourself.

I've also done this at work numerous times, and have been working on various NLP tasks for over a decade now. For all future traditional NLP tasks the first pass is going to be to get fetch LLM embeddings and stick on a fairly simple classification model.

> One prompt? Fair. 10? Still ok. 100? You're pushing it. 10M - get help.

"Prompting" is not how you use LLMs for classification tasks. Sure you can build 0-shot classifiers for some tricky tasks, but if you're doing classification for documents today and you're not starting with an embedding model you're missing some easy gains.
less controlling than banning the software alltogether.

The government bans plenty of activities. Taking illegal drugs. Murdering people. Fishing without a license. Investing in unregulated stocks, Etc. Why not addictive apps?
Whenever I see discussions of GERD I like to bring up this paper (and the reedit discussion around it) where they basically tried a supplement with every likely helper and it worked 100% of the time: https://www.reddit.com/r/GERD/comments/adt6vh/regression_of_...

| The aim of this study was to investigate if a dietary supplementation containing: melatonin, l-tryptophan, vitamin B6, folic acid, vitamin B12, methionine and betaine would help patients with GERD,

| All patients of the group A (100%) reported a complete regression of symptoms after 40 days of treatment. On the other hand, 115 subjects (65.7%) of the omeprazole reported regression of symptoms in the same period
Thanks! This is something every company producing smart-stuff should be thinking about, though unfortunately I think many do not. ;)
I got my 65" TV in the back of mine, although it was a tight fit.
Scout Warns VW Dealers Fighting Direct Sales That It's Not Playing Around
Per everything I've ever read on this, a bee that has stung meat is no longer able to survive. It will either try to pull itself out and disembowel itself, or it will remain stack and die of hunger. What makes you think a bee that stings, say, a dog that can't swat it will then go on to survive?
> There are systems that spend more per student than the US does, more % of GDP than the US does, they have lower classroom sizes than the US, they have better systems for gifted students, their students spend more time in class, they pay teachers professional salaries, they have more state of the art instructional programs, etc. etc. etc. None are trending towards the outcomes you're suggesting; in particular the EU isn't producing more billionaires

Look, everyone acknowledges Europe has a stagnation problem, America is better for startups, and the USD being the principal reserve currency makes Americans richer. You cannot directly compare countries like that. I know you're smart enough to recognize that, so I'm astonished you wrote this down.

Ideally, you could just randomly assign two policies, and see which works better. But in the real world, pretty much all studies in education are surveys, and it's hard to account for differences in space (countries/culture/socioeconomic status). Even differences in time (when new policies are introduced) have confounders, but less so. If you look at those studies, you'll find that new policies that throw money at smaller class sizes or higher-quality teachers lead to better educational outcomes. It's uncontroversial to say that better educational outcomes lead to better salaries, and higher wealth generation. (BTW, I'm not using wealth to mean USD, I mean quality-of-life. The USD is just a convenient proxy. Not sure if that was clear earlier.)

Tracking is more controversial. However, the one study that did just randomly assign tracking to 120 first grade classes found it benefited everyone:

https://www.educationnext.org/tracking-improve-learning/

Most other studies use standardized exams (e.g. the PISA), and let me remind you, those are not difficult enough to see improvement for the upper percentiles! You flippantly dismissed it, but it's a huge deal. If your national assessment were the AMC 10/12 the bottom 50% would all score zero points (really 37.5, but that's irrelevant), and tracking would look like a resounding success if the top few thousand showed improvement.
"The law allows the president to grant a 90-day extension of the ban deadline if there is “evidence of significant progress” toward a sale and “binding legal agreements.” ByteDance has resisted selling, and the Chinese government has said it opposes such a move."
I don't get this take. China is constantly stealing US IP. The US simply wanted to cut out the foreign influence, while allowing free speech of the users. That's a simple plan and makes a lot of sense. China doesn't allow any of the big US platforms to influence their people for a similar reason, and it's valid. What you pitch is a very optimistic Communist outlook, which has never panned out anywhere in the world where the experiment was tried.
It will not, or even for less-than-car-sized optical manufacturing.
I understand the hype. I think most humans understand why a machine responding to a query like never before in the history of mankind is amazing.

What you’re going through is hype overdose. You’re numb to it. Like I can get if someone disagrees but it’s a next level lack of understanding human behavior if you don’t get the hype at all.

There exists living human beings who are still children or with brain damage with comparable intelligence to an LLM and we classify those humans as conscious but we don’t with LLMs.

I’m not trying to say LLMs are conscious but just saying that the creation of LLMs marks a significant turning point. We crossed a barrier 2 years ago somewhat equivalent to landing on the moon and i am just dumb founded that someone doesn’t understand why there is hype around this.
A new 200A electrical panel costs $5000-6000 to be installed with a permit in SV. If you want to run 50A wire for an L2 charger that might be $1000-2000 more. Getting close to $10000, so I'd say it is fairly expensive.
In the same way I can state as an objective fact that Patrick Mahomes is way better than either of us at being a quarterback, I can say that any painting I've ever done isn't as good as the Mona Lisa.
We have had the same problem at my client now for the last couple of months, but from Facebook (using their IP ranges). They don’t even respect the 429 headers and the business is hesitant to outright ban them in case it impacts open graph or Facebook advertising tooling.
It's freedom of speech until you say bad stuff about Americas 51st state in the middle east that's killing on average 5 children every day with our tax money.

That was not the freedom of speech your supposed to hear on social media. That's why it's a threat. Be like Twitter and ban those accounts instead.
Did you do it at a dealership, at a non-affiliated garage, or yourself?

I could see how there could be situations when someone tries to sell you into changing all the cells, even when that’s not necessary.
AGI currently is an intentionally vague and undefined goal. This allows businesses to operate towards a goal, define the parameters, and relish in the “rocket launches”-esque hype without leaving the vague umbrella of AI. It allows businesses to claim a double pursuit. Not only are they building AGI but all their work will surely benefit AI as well. How noble. Right?

It’s vagueness is intentional and allows you to ignore the blind truth and fill in the gaps yourself. You just have to believe it’s right around the corner.
Ok so I quickly typed up a response- there is a lot of nuance that’s not going to be captured in a few sentences.

The government has absolutely imprisoned people for speech it doesn’t like. In the Parma case, a citizen put up a parody page satirizing the local police department, he was jailed for several days awaiting trial. And the Supreme Court ruled that the victim was unable to sue the police department for doing so because of qualified immunity: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court.... Parody publications The Onion and The Babylon Bee both filed amicus briefs to the Supreme Court, which are hilarious reads btw. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/2022...

Recently there was also the case of Michael Cohen, where it was found that he was remanded to solitary confinement as retaliation for him refusing to give up his rights to publish a book critical of the sitting us president: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-files-first-amendme... and https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=122506763932389.... This brings up an interesting issue as the administration pointed to an undisclosed nda (assumed to be agreed to as private citizens) was used as an argument for the federal government to intervene as a criminal matter not civil.

I find your argument about forcing the app store providers to remove the TikTok app compelling. I was curious how the Supreme Court handled that issue in its recent opinion on the matter and a quick skim didn’t find any references to app stores. See https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf.

My first thought is that if TikTok is barred from operating in the United States, it may simply be a condition of the store policies to have a legally recognized operating company in the country before your app can be approved for the store. So in this case the government is not directly demanding the store to remove the app, but rather the store itself simply enforcing its own t’s and c’s

Finally, there is plenty of precedent for regulating foreign speech - for example FARA which is very wide reaching. https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/frequently-asked-questions
If such a generator were powered by nat gas rather than being a battery of sorts, then even being a bit less efficient than an ICE would be attractive if the generator were simpler and had a lower TCO than the ICE equivalent.
Why shouldn't different or even "opposite" traits also be successful? When faced with random inheritable differences across different species over long periods of time why wouldn't the result be a variety of them, every one of which just didn't prevent reproduction from passing those traits on to the next generation? Some traits might be seen as "better" or "worse" by comparison but as long as they get passed on, we'll see both. It isn't about being "best". It's about being "good enough"