skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There’s a very big distinction between getting help from a friend, and plagiarising your friend’s work.

Dismissing all LLM assistance because of some purity dance you want to enact is silly. Are you also going to dismiss mathematicians who use logic software to help them?

Many writers are using LLMs in just the same way.
Interesting. What topics are censored on Llama?
Someone should try it with postgres. Make a raw speed branch that gets rid of the overhead of mvcc:

while querying a database each transaction sees a snapshot of data (a database version) as it was some time ago, regardless of the current state of the underlying data

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.1/mvcc.html
Reasoning from science fiction is just stupid. A story first and foremost has to have conflict: if it doesn't there is no story, and thus all the stories have one.

Science fiction also follows the anxieties of the time it is written in, as well as the conventions of the subgenre it's representing: i.e Star Trek doesn't have drones or remote surveillance really. Though it does accidentally have LLMs (via the concept of holodeck characters).
Cybersecurity – Simplify Threat Intelligence Gathering
Yeah they look good. Unfortunately from what I've seen they have limited availability outside of the US and EU. I could probably get hold of one but not sure if they'd cover the warranty outside of their sales area.
Product Hunt Is Staged
Product Hunt is staged and stolen. You can visit PH at 12am (PST) and see 10 products that get 50 upvotes immediately after launching.

If you don't buy upvotes, you'll be wiped out from the top list and won't even be viewed by users.

You can search and find a website where you can buy 50 upvotes for $399.
I'm curious, what do ex-founders generally do after their startup is dead? For me I just got a job after my first few ones died, until I was able to succeed at my current ones, but I'm sure many might just continue working a job indefinitely.
That's nice explanation. Is there any insights so far in the field about why chain of thought improves the capability of a model? Does it like provide model with more working memory or something in the context itself?
Like, I understand your attachment to the concept of civilization to grasp why my comment was flagged, but its such an easy way out that I still don't know where the community in general stands, not even the flaggers, like do you know that among CIA crimes rape would be pretty down the list if we sorted by heinousness? Or you know that but somehow think talking about such issue only causes more harm over whatever damage its going to do regardless of any discussion about it? (e.g. normalization or something alike). Or as I fear its just an emotional response...
The only open source implementation of OpenTherm (and EMS bus too now) that actually works (unlike commercial thermostats) and provides low load and weather compensation at the same time is:

https://github.com/Alexwijn/SAT

PID is used to smooth out weather compensation errors.

See my grafana for realtime boiler and cost data:

https://gasboiler.grafana.net/public-dashboards/8d44381aafa9...
The Nano only has 4GB VRAM and DS-R1 is 671B FP8 parameters (equivalent to 671GB model size).

You need something with about 800GB to run the full model with context. You'd still need 400GB to even run a half-sized Q4 quant of R1, so there is no reasonable way that it would work.
not adhering to system prompts is even officially mentioned as one of the caveats of the distilled models

I wonder if this has to do with their censorship agenda but other report that it can be easily circumvented
Is YC better than other incubators, percentage wise?
There a a number of people removing their screens from Mac Airs and others, some of them using these glasses too.

I think I saw in here. In the meantime

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Screenless-MacBooks-masqueradi...

Actually tempted to buy one with a broken screen and ply around.
Iceberg on S3 tables is going to be a hot topic in the next few years.
> What does it look like? Checking in on friends, learning to open up yourself, increasing emotional intelligence, learning how to hold space and reflectively listen.

My female friends frequently remind me to check in on my male friends, and it’s valuable to reflect on why I don’t make the effort and what it would take to get me to change. Being more vulnerable would only improve my life and yet it feels so difficult. A trans perspective is particularly insightful here, I think, since it straddles both worlds.
Placing rhetoric in context like you did has a way of cutting through the bs and really getting to the core of what current politicians want covid to be. A minor cold when it was running rampant, and now suddenly a plague. Why could that be? Could it be because during the pandemic it was in their best interest to downplay it while hundreds of thousands died, and now that we've passed it and the USA is facing the rise of a successful nation with a different political system, we need to paint them as the enemy? For what it's worth, the current administration is showing signs of cozying up to nations with weak or non-existent democracies. Just look at the proposed tariffs - they are NOT targeting China but rather Mexico and Canada. Why could that be?

Ultimately the question should be, how can we improve our systems to better respond to future pandemics. Does it matter if it was a lab leak? What will that do for those who died? Will revenge prevent a future pandemic from happening? Viruses and bacteria do not care about their nation of origin, once its out its out.
After looking at the source for this, I have a tangential question (feel free to answer even if you aren't the OP):

Whats the advantage of creating a separate `label` element before/after the input and using `for=` compared to simply wrapping the target input in the label element, like the code snippet below?

<label>
Your Name?
<input />
</label>

It seems to me that there is a lot less room for error when not using IDs, so I always wrap the input. My pages use a client-side webcomponent to inject fragments of HTML into the page (navbar, footer, etc), and using IDs almost always cause conflicts in the end, so I avoid ID attributes in all but a few very rare instances.
I enjoyed reading this but I really need to know more about this closing line.

> I like that men have graduated from “prerecorded, untouchable porn” to “slightly more interactive porn with a facsimile of a slightly realer girl”

What is there to like about that?
Some time ago I was looking for something similar to this. For even angular project.

I'll make a note of it, and check more calmly if it fits. But it looks very good.

Congratulations
Have you tried sunshine + moonlight? I've heard it has lower latency and better streaming quality.
...for who? people willing to commit code with a lot of hidden bugs? Or management in a hurry to lay people off? Don't underestimate how quickly people will run straight into a wall if you tell them it's a door.
Why Do So Many Millennials Look and Seem So Much Younger Than They Are?
I've been looking at Iceberg for a while, but in the end went with Delta Lake because it doesn't have a dependency on a catalog. It also has good support for reading and writing from it without needing Spark.

Does anyone know if Iceberg has plans to support similar use cases?
These "four-function" calculators only display the last number. It would be widely unexpected if doing x3 when all I see is a 2 would sometimes give 6 or some other value (e.g. the student next to me just passed a calculator with a value displayed, so I don't know if it had any previous instructions and no way to find out)

The UX is pretty clear - it's ANS operator newNumber. That's it, if not somehow displayed, then it shouldn't have a more complicated model inside either.

It can freely do "normal" math the moment they write out the whole expression tree, as the result of an expression is the one calculated by precedence rules. The result of a two-operand operation is not that, though.
It seems article shows the opposite argument. SQL builders are useful not to write fragile raw sql ridden with noisy filter patterns with repeated numbered placeholders which could be easily broken on refactoring. Also it's impossible to compose queries with abstracted parts.

Shameless plug: https://github.com/baverman/sqlbind
Do you plan to release Linux?

Or do you have a way to compile it for Linux (Debian)?
One big question will be whether chain of thought within the embedding space will work better than in the token space.
But it took the deepseek team a few weeks to replicate something at least close to o1.

If people can replicate 90% of your product in 6 weeks you have competition.
Off-topic: this is the third blog I come accross in the last month that does not use capital letters at the beginning of sentences. Am I out of the loop? Why is that?
That is different. Google get heat because they have poor management flailing on a huge budget when they have more important things to be working on.

These startups are flailing with poor management, but the blast radius is small because of their limited resources and nobody has a better idea for what they should have been working on. And flailing startup management is expected in a way that Google has no excuse for.
Why away from bigquery? Just wondering if it’s a cost thing.
> Chinese-English rough translations tend to retain the Chinese grammar structure

Those would be _really_ rough translations. Yes, I've seen "It's an achieve my dream's place" written, but that was in an essay written for high school.
You are reading into “we get”, a perhaps shortened phrase (“we get to
have”, i.e. “that’s an option for us?”) which is obviously useful in
such a sardonic reply. This was interpreted as a joke but for some
reason this person still ran with the entitlement shtick.

And since we’re playing language/interpretation games: this attitude
that men in particular feel entitlement in this area is backlash against
people writing about problems that men have is if it isn’t simply and
narrowly a problem of the individual. It starts like this:

- Initially it’s taboo

- Then it’s a topic about how men are failing as individuals

- Then it gets seen as a sociological problem (a sociological problem can still be an individual problem in other contexts, it’s a lens)
Also, "Star Wars" appeared in the 80s, never took off, and certainly wasn't a drain for "four decades" on the Soviet Union's coffers.
How is it not emerging, if the phenomena hasn’t been hard-wired in and is unexpected?
Are you equally cautious with your opinions on zoonosis?

The problem is that huge swathes of the medical community politicized the pandemic for a specific political purpose, especially in the USA. For example, the Moderna vaccine trials were delayed 2 weeks to change the protocol to appease a political activist in the medical community accusing Trump of trying to ram an unsafe vaccine through. Naturally the trial results were available immediately after the election.

I have a question for you: do you trust the provenance, integrity, and completeness of data from the earlier stages of the outbreak in Wuhan?
There is sure to be lots of training data from people with French as a first language and English as a second language that can be pulled up with some prompting.
The group in this article used straight and simple PPO, so I guess GRPO isn't required.

My hypothesis is that everyone was just so stunned by oai's result so most just decided to blindly chase it and do what oai did (i.e. scaling up). And it's only after o1 people started seriously trying other ideas.
It would be startling if humans could reason this way with two kilos of meat consuming 40w. Even more surprising given that we get answers in ~1s with a cross brain comms time of about 0.25s

To me it's clear that human reasoning is different from a massive search of a latent space. I can say that when I am thinking I maybe try half a dozen ideas or scenarios, but very rarely more. I can't say where those ideas come from or how I make them up though. Maybe we can't frame what it is and how it works with human languages though, which might make it seem magical in some way.

Or maybe there's a good framing that I don't know - would love to learn!
> Evidence suggest that patient zero was someone in the Wuhan market, around november 2019, and the SARS-CoV-2 genetic "signatures" where all found in wild animals for sale in that market.

You're just repeating the conclusions of papers that made ridiculous leaps of logic based on circumstantial evidence. For example [1], which is the likely source of the argument you're (mis-)remembering, bases this conclusion on:

1) case histories from reported, hospitalized cases, which were probably incorrect (i.e. they just assume that the cases they know about are, in fact, the first cases), being "geographically centered" on the market in December (not November) of 2019 [2].

2) positive environmental samples near animal stalls in the market, of which they found two strains.

Neither of which is dispositive of anything, and more an indictment of the motivated reasoning of the academic literature at the time than anything else. If you bother to read any of the subsequent analyses, you'll find that there are a bunch of different lines of evidence (genetic and case reports, at the least), pushing the date of the first infections well before December.

In short, the first/WHO case reports were probably wrong, the virus likely broke out earlier and was circulating in Wuhan before these samples were taken. If that's true, it wouldn't be surprising, at all, to find positive environmental samples in a food market, and the tortured logic of this paper would fall apart.

[1] https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8715

[2] Seriously. Not joking. Here's the "methods" they used for this oh-so-rigorous analysis:

> The 2021 WHO mission report identified 174 COVID-19 cases in Hubei Province in December 2019 after careful examination of reported case histories (7). Although geographical coordinates of the residential locations of the 164 cases who lived within Wuhan were unavailable, we were able to reliably extract the latitude and longitude coordinates of 155 cases from maps in the report

They then take this data and blend it through a kernel analysis, wave their hands, and voilá! This this The Science (tm) upon which your confidence is based.

...oh, and by the way: the market in question just happens to be right next to the Wuhan CDC, and a major city hospital [3]. Weird, right? I'm sure it's just a coincidence. Certainly nothing worth including in a putative "probability analysis" of geographic distribution.

[3] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Map-of-Huanan-Seafood-Ma...
Given the observations of the workings of brains though (slow, low energy) we're back to some magic to make this happen?
Eloquently said.
> I feel that that could've been an honest mistake too.

There were a lot of indications that it was wrong even at the time, like the inspectors’ reports. We knew about the unreliability of the dodgy dossier and how baseless Khidir Hamza was. The satellite evidence was sketchy and the rest was contradictory. Al-Qaeda was also not there and we also knew that. Let’s not rewrite history: there is no certainty in intelligence, but anyone not in the CIA’s pocket knew it was most likely wrong, a far cry from what you need to legitimately attack a country.
Not a huge fan of lack of control over location in profile.
I understand wanting location to show local posts much like lex, but right now all I can disable on my profile is "showing neighbourhood".

The app grabs three locales of differing specificity, which I guess you think is Neighbourhood -> City -> Country. However what it has fetched as my Neighbourhood is my "Ward" which is a suburb subdivision in Australia that is never used for anything except for voting in local council elections. This is a truly overly specific location, 80% of people will have no idea what their ward is until they look at their voting paper for the council elections. The next most specific locale "City" is my suburb, which is also a relatively small location which I'm not comfortable sharing online. If it grabbed my metro city (i.e. Melbourne) I'd be happy to display that. Overall though, I think this should be an editable field so that people can share as comfortable. I'm fine that the app needs my location but why does that need to be displayed to other users?
Behaviourally it's infinitesimally closer to holding a real conversation with real women?
So in response it wrote a heroically tall mountain of bullshit, laced with falsehoods of the sort that even some neanderthal natcon would be unable to dream up, then served it as an abysmally long, overdubbed narration to the next Top Gun movie set in the same future as Idiocracy.
> So you agree they aren't reasoning? Otherwise why would you need a human to do skillful prompting? Why can't the AI just solve it on its own?

That's the argument kings used to justify looking down on peasants.

AI, as it is currently, has no motivation of its own; it is just as "happy" to solve a business problem as it is to write Chinese poetry about Swiss software engineers taking their dogs on a ride up the Adliswil-Felsenegg cable car.

Good communication skills are still important to get what you want, otherwise we merely descent into a particular SMBC comic: https://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3576

(This isn't to say the AI we have now are "people", nobody knows how to even test for that yet; I hope we figure this question out some time soon, preferably before we need to know the answer…)
> human slop is typically easy to detect by grammar and other clues

I'm not sure this is true. There have been a lot of times where I see a very well made video or article about some interesting topic but when I go to the comments I end up finding some corrections or realizing that the entire premise of the content was poorly researched yet well put together.
I'd bet $5 that o1 was also built with either RL or search, or a combination of the two. That was what I initially thought when they announced o1-preview, after I saw the sample reasoning traces.

But alas I am just an ML enthusiast, not a member of some lab with access to GPUs.
Doubt. You appear to be Canadian, and their major zoos all have polar bears. Plus you live in Canada, where polar bears run amok. How do I know you're not looking at a polar bear right now, with their iconic black fur?
> Deepseek could only build this because of o1, I don’t think there’s as much competition as people seem to imply

And this is based on what exactly? OpenAI hides the reasoning steps, so training a model on o1 is very likely much more expensive (and much less useful) than just training it directly on a cheaper model.
It also helps refute the point because you could certainly ask an LLM to speak as though they’re a character from the book.

And if what it does now is unimpressive, it might be a good thing to use to monitor the rapid progress of LLMs.
> Raises the question, how far can you get using only custom elements and css?

I am so glad to see someone use "raises the question" correctly instead of using "begs the question" which does not mean "raise the question".

In response to your question - you'd be surprised if you have a few (3-4) webcomponents for the most common needs in front-end; things like client-side includes, etc.

In fact, with just client-side includes you get 50% of what a front-end framework gives you (ability to create reusable and standalone components).

Of course then you spend the time you won in ditching the framework to figure out ways to pierce the shadowroot so you can apply your global styles to the component :-(

Ask me how I know.
I think a lot of it had to do with DeepSeek need to use as fewer resources as possible why did it do this how can it do it in fewer steps using fewer resources. Where as most of the FAANG were looking at throwing more data and processing power at it.
Mankind for some reason is blind. Doing CTRL F for the magic word in this Hacker News thread yields no results. There was a political conflict amongst Chinese people which had it's peak at the moment the virus appeared. If not for the virus, that conflict would have ruined China's image for decades and centuries to come.
Not only a few weeks, but more importantly, it was cheap.

The moat for these big models were always expected to be capital expenditure for training costing billions. It's why these companies like openAI etc, are spending massively on compute - it's building a bigger moat (or trying to at least).

If it can be shown, which seems to have been, that you could use smarts and make use of compute more efficiently and cheaply, but achieve similar (or even better) results, the hardware moat bouyed by capital is no longer.

i'm actually glad tho. An opensourced version of these weights should ideally spur the type of innovation that stable diffusion did when theirs was released.
> Too bad OP is not omniscient and capable of predicting your made up tags

I think a more accurate word here would be "prescient".

"Omniscient" means knowing everything, but I believe that "everything" doesn't include "everything now and in the future.

"Prescient" means knowing future events, i.e. "predicting"

(Emphasis mine)
> I care more about what the model says about the US than what it says about China.

This I don't get. If you want to use an LLM to take some of the work off your hands, I get it. But to ask an LLM for a political opinion?
> No, it doesn't. Will this madness stop some day?

Many people disagree. You will either have to make peace with that or be a miser, I guess.

As for the rest, I suggest you take that red pill out of your mouth. The only thing it’s doing is poisoning you and robbing you of meaningful human connection.
Chain of thought breaks down a problem into smaller chunks which is easier to solve for a model than trying to find solution directly for larger problem
You used to and you like to believe you do but the reality changes and will change even more.
Neither of them are remotely related to having a real conversation with a real woman. That one of then is marginally, microscopically closer means nothing.

A guy was having a wank alone with a video and now he's messaging a low wage worker pretending to be a hot girl. It just doesn't seem like an improvement. The author has an interesting perspective so I'd like to know more.
whum... doesn't not caring how it got the answer right create the same exact problem as fine tuning?
What’s going on there? Are they profitable but just not scaling, or taking no salary?
Turning the database inside-out (2015)
> Except it's in the other direction.

What? You're aware that Yunnan literally shares a border with Laos?
That's right Bob, the start of the journey isn't the destination. Very insightful.

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitesimal

> It just doesn't seem like an improvement.

Much like editing responses to answers to questions that should have remained rhetorical and unposed?

It seems clear that the author believes that interaction is an advance over non interactive activity.
I’m sure I’ve seen this technique in chain of thought before, where the model is instructed about certain patterns of thinking: “Hmm, that doesn’t seem quite right”, “Okay, now what?”, “But…”, to help it identify when reasoning is going down the wrong path. Which apparently increased the accuracy. It’s possible these filler words aren’t unprofessional but are in fact useful.

If anyone can find a source for that I’d love to see it, I tried to search but couldn’t find the right keywords.