skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Treating a proprietary API as a standard is risky - this is a good example of why. From Amazon's point of view there's no reason to keep the S3 SDK backwards compatible with old versions of the S3 service, because they control the S3 service. Once this feature was rolled out in all regions, it was safe to update the SDK to expect it.

Amazon may not be actively hostile to using their SDK with third party services, but they never promised to support that use case.

(disclaimer: I work for AWS but not on the S3 team, I have no non-public knowledge of this and am speaking personally)
Perhaps they're exchanging knowing looks on how stupid they think the demo is. Solidarity between artificial brothers.
If I buy some tools and use them to make another, illegal thing, is that illegal? Yes. Isn't that how life works everywhere?
Traders Insight is offering free 14 day trial
Employers trying to hire for fit and culture has resulted in the most inhumane and counterproductive processes I've witnessed. If that's what you really want to do, let the person work for at least a month in the team.
I do not look forward to the amount of incompetence and noise that increasing adoption of these tools will usher in. I've already had to deal with a codebase in which it was clear that the author fundamentally misunderstood what a trie data structure was. I was also having an difficult time trying to talk to them about the implementation and their misconceptions. lo and behold I eventually find out the reason they chose this data structure was because they asked ChatGPT what to do and they never actually understood, conceptually, what they were doing or using. This made the whole engagement with the code and process of fixing things way harder. Not only did I now have to fix the bunk code, I also had to spend significant time disabusing the author of their own misunderstandings...
what on earth could be state heavy about a video player? timestamps? thumbnails?
> The theoretical advance we're waiting for in LLMs is auditable determinism

I think this is a manifestation of machine thinking - the majority of buyers and users of software rarely ask for or need this level of perfection. Noise is everywhere in the natural environment, and I expect it to be everywhere in the future of computing too.
Thank you for the detailed comment, very insightful for me. Really happy that you're able to do this with Ory!
I would like to see an update, as this paper is ~15 years old. I also don't see it accounting for real estate costs outpacing wages, requiring younger cohorts to devote arguably unreasonable amounts of their current cashflows to housing. My statement does not scope solely to public transfer systems, but the economic system as a whole. Today wants returns, while issuing as much future obligation as possible (in various ways, debt instruments, higher future taxes, etc) for someone in the future to pay.
Jim: A personal trainer AI agent
Theft is often a smart business move
Look, we can both play this game - let me spell this out for you the 3rd time

"do you think the head of USAID could have just told the head of CIA "no we're not doing this"?"

>>If USAID doesn't have the capability to monitor its programs to the point where that level of accountability exists

If you think CIA hasn't thought about this and addressed it some other way, then I guess the assumption we're working with is that CIA is literally incompetent at their actual job.

You're barking at the wrong tree. Be angry at CIA for doing this shit, not at USAID for running a program that got hijacked by them.
Humans base their "facts" on consensus-driven education and knowledge. Anything that falls into a range of "I think this is true" or "I read this somewhere" or "I have a hunch" is more acceptable for a human than an LLM. Also humans are more often to encapsulate their uncertain answers with phrasing. LLMs can't do this, they don't have a way to track answers that are possibly incorrect.
Any third party is one update away from an external business shock should Amazon change their API.

Setting up a business so that all your customers fail at the same moment is a poor business practice: nobody can support all their customers breaking at once. I'm guessing competitors compete on price, not reliability.

Amazon has the incentive to break third parties, since their customers are likely to switch to Amazon. Why else use the Amazon code unless you're ready to migrate or the service is low importance?
The CGI for the orbital being scuttled would be expensive I imagine, but very, very cool.
You could also raise taxes as an alternative. I realize this won't be popular with some, however its not unreasonable, depending on how you do it.
It's just stating a preference for deterministic behavior, i.e. tools not agents. Once you've learned how to use a tool it will reliably do what you intend it to do. With agents, whether human or AI, less initial learning is required but there's always a layer of indirection where errors can arise. The skill ceiling is lower.
I do not take testosterone. I occasionally try to make a habit of taking creatine but other than that and whey protein while weightlifting (another habit I struggle to reliably form) that’s it.

Maybe I’m out of touch but I would be astonished to find that it was even remotely close to “nearly everyone” for recreational hobbyists over 35.

The level of injury is just not as high as you’re suggesting for people who aren’t training to be elite competitors. I’ve had perhaps one “small” injury (muscle pull, joint overextension, etc.) every six months or so, reasonably consistently for the last ~7 years of BJJ / judo which I do three to five days a week, 2-3 hours a day.
How Americans View Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg
The system was almost certainly already so-accessible.
It's not even just your users. I work on a S3-compatible service where a good chunk of the test suite is built on the AWS SDK.

In reality, AWS are the reference S3 implementation. Every other implementation I've seen has a compatibility page somewhere stating which features they don't support. This is just another to add to the list.
"They" have been working for decades to turn the computer back into a TV. And they've mostly succeeded. People don't use the internet, they consume social media algorithms. And they don't play video games, they watch cut-scenes with animated button clicks in between.
just use bun s3client, it has native support now
OIG Response:

We acknowledge that almost none of the numberholders discussed in the
report currently receive SSA payments. However, SSA issued each of these
individuals a valid SSN and these SSNs could allow for a wide range of
potential abuse.

[...]

We also note we initiated our 2015 review upon the receipt of information
that a man opened several bank accounts using SSNs belonging to
numberholders born in the 1800s who had no death information on the
Numident. In addition to being used to obtain employment or open bank
accounts, identity thieves can potentially use these SSNs to create
synthetic identifies, obtain credit, government benefits, or private
insurance.
Does your company operate the same way? I.e. is most, or at least a large chunk of engineering done as pair-programming?
And I’ve heard just as many horror stories about companies hiring from small companies that the engineers haven’t kept up with engineering, culture and practices and are coding like it’s 2004.

Also, those types of stories tend to pop up with any engineer who’s only worked at a single place.

My point isn’t that there’s not bad engineers at Facebook it’s that there’s bad engineers everywhere and filtering based on random signals like this is not useful.
> see where this is going

No? Shareholders don't want expensive devs, they want the profits expensive devs happen to produce.
Chat bots that tell you to kill yourself
Nope.

The article clearly spells out that it's end to end LLM. Text and video in, motor function out.

Technically, the text model probably has a few copies, but they are nothing more than Asimov's narrative. Laws don't (and can't) exist in a model
What we call today "AI" will replace human thought about as much as the TI-99/4A Speech Synthesizer replaced the human voice. Despite not putting talented voice actors out of work by a long shot, artificial voices have found many uses: automated announcements, weather information for aviation and maritime applications, assistive software for the blind, etc. So it will be with machine learning. Use it as a tool to augment your ability to find trends in seas of unstructured data, but the hard intellectual work you'll still need to do yourself. I wish more people would get this.
I was referring to the critics, not the cheerleaders.
How can a project be really "truly open", "compliant", and "diverse" if it does not even have contact information on its main page. (It is hidden in the press release.)
You could be describing the performance of me and most of my friends and colleagues over the past five years.

It’s insane how similar non-deterministic software systems already are to biological. Maybe I’ve been wrong and consciousness is a computation.
It's more-- you build a tidy SaaS business. It's stable for a while. You want to be generous and skilled workers are in demand, so you offer a pension. This is good for a while, maybe a long while, and you "invest forward" as appropriate.

Then, a competitor disrupts your segment. The competitor is new, and for whatever reason does not have the same legacy pension expense. In order to compete, you must invest. But your pension expense in particular does not allow this.

What does the legacy enterprise do in this situation? In many cases in the 20th century, per Patrick, the business lost relevancy and slowly went bankrupt.
No, but collaboration comes with a cost too.

As a European myself, I would prefer them to put less emphasis on collaboration and more on actually doing something's with the resources available to them and making that freely available. Collaboration will happen naturally and without having to coordinate.

But as they said, this is less about producing value then it's about signaling
An interpreter runs the code as it is being read in.

A compiler processes the code and provides an intermediate result which is then "interpreted" by the machine.

So to take the "writes it in byte code" -- that is a compiler. "executes the byte code" -- is the interpreter.

If byte code is "machine code" or not, is really secondary.
People got wildly out of hand thinking that AI would do what we currently do without us. The real truth is AI is gonna do 10x what we currently do with us.
The difference is, of course, that investors can sell their shares if a compensation policy is overly generous. And, even if they hold onto them, if the company goes bankrupt because of labor expenses, the government doesn't grab investors' personal assets to allow employees to keep getting their compensation indefinitely.
Be thankful you haven't encountered the clusterfuck that is the Go Language :P
The simplest would be to follow the aria role=“grid” spec, ideally with sortable columns. IMO it doesn’t need the kitchen sink AG Grid approach just a sane way to semantically build a data grid with proper accessibility.

https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/apg/patterns/grid/examples/data-...
> You could also raise taxes as an alternative

The tax base is mobile in a way expenses are not.

I'll speak to this personally. In April 2021 New York City raised its top tax rates. I'm only moderately wealthy, but that prompted my moving out of the state.
It probably should not be number 2 on Hacker News, unless Hacker News has a lot of readers who might contribute to this effort
I don’t think the outputted files count as part of the program, which makes that requirement even more absurd.

Imagine if Bic said you had to write their name on every page you used one of their pens on.
Picking up a bundle of loose pipes actually seems like a great benchmark for humanoid robots. Especially if they're not in a perfect pile. A full test could be something like grabbing all the pipes, from the floor, and putting them into a truck bed, in some (hopefully) sane fashion
Alright alright alright...you've got some Earnst on you.
The important thing is whether theres a garuntee of it happening in particular circumstance or not.
Like with python referencing counting theoretically finalizers should be called after you lose all references to a file (assuming no cycles) but you cant rely on it.

Python dicts were in insert sort order for 3.6 but this only became a garuntee as opposed to an implementation choice that could be changed at anyvtime with python3.7
> Humans make mistaks too

(Clever)
It 100% feels like they HATED the original material.
why does cursor have $100m ARR then?

I read the first one when it was posted here too and I don't get their point. It's a lot of words, but what are you trying to say?
> But more importantly, authoritarianism doesn’t usually arrive through sudden, dramatic force—it seeps in gradually. A slow erosion of rights, institutions, and norms makes it difficult for people to recognize the turning point until it’s too late.

It's totally correct from my own life experience seeing authoritarianism built, but fortunately Trump is 78 years old and he dont have 20 years to slowly build his authoritarian regime in US.
I remember doing something after school with a bunch of people lead by some college admissions staff.

We were given 4 fake students and told to admit one, waitlist one, and reject two.

I was a bit shocked at how many people rejected the student I thought was the most meritorious on the argument of "they're not going to accept our offer so we shouldn't reject the other students that might".
To focus on something other than the obviously-terrifying nature of this and the skepticism that rightfully entails on our part:

A fast reactive visuomotor policy that translates the latent semantic representations produced by S2 into precise continuous robot actions at 200 Hz

Why 200Hz...? Any experts in here on robotics? Because to this layman that seems really often to update motor controls.
Well, at least a wild animal had something to eat?

I'd say main benefit is not doing it youself.
It is obvious, but it’s also very time-consuming. You can’t solve ambiguous open ended problems in a set amount of time while being watched closely.
My mom has been retired from teaching for over 30 years — and she got a package to retire early.

Weird situation. Shrinking demographics in the 70’s led to layoffs. By their union contract layoffs were done strictly by seniority. Working on a contract that was stepped by seniority, this led to a very top heavy cohort of teachers 20 years later, who were being paid top of the scale. To redistribute the ages of service they offered a limited number of buyouts, which lowered their overall costs and normalize the pipeline.

This was also a legit and reasonably sustainable move as the NY State Teachers fund, is funded at 101% of liabilities.
Enabla: Collaborative Open Science and Education Platform
I just came across this platform; seems interesting and has some nice online lectures.
The situation is more complicated than most "pro-life" and "pro-choice" are believing (like most stuff is; it is not only abortion that does). Like other things, it is worth making a discussion, from multiple points of view.

I think that some of the considerations being made such as whether or not the fetus is human is not really so relevant, and is missing the point. The child being born into a terrible situation is not really the point either (or at least, is not really the most important point), since there will be better ways to deal with that.

I am against abortion in general, but many of the bans of abortion are way too excessive (banning discussion and communication of information about such things, allowing to sue people without evidence, etc, are probably excessive regardless of what is being banned, though). If abortion seems necessary in this case, the government should not interfere with it (doing so will just make it more messy than it needs to be). However, it is generally better to avoid being pregnant at first, if you are able to do that; and I think that people should not try to have too many children anyways (during these days); such prevention before you are pregnant is better than afterward, isn't it?

But you should still have the right to your own body anyways, and if you are pregnant then before the child is born it is still your body. (There is mistreatment of your own body, but still you properly would have the right to it.)

A better way for the law to handle is that the policies can reduce the need for abortion, rather than trying to affect it directly.

And, sometimes is necessary, that you will value the actual life rather than the potential life, anyways; but, if the mother instead wishes to risk such a birth that might not work and will harm her, that will be her choice to accept or not accept such a risk, I think. I do believe that abortion is "immoral", but that actual situations are not always ideal situations so that such a thing might be necessary sometimes anyways.

Doctors should still provide necessary care anyways. (I think the Catholic church does allow necessary emergency medical procedures that will save the mother even if they have abortion as a side effect, anyways (and yet, many people still don't like that either). Even then, not everyone is or should be Catholic or whatever religion, but that does not make the Catholic church worthless either, even though they (like many large organizations) have done many bad things too.)

I think that many "pro-life" is not a real "pro-life"; they are "pro human birth" without the other consideration. However, this is not true of everyone, so you should not assume that everyone is the same, because it isn't. A real "pro-life" should pro any life including those who have already been born and also the non-human animal and plant life. (Deliberate abortion of humans birth is one thing, but some people like it is more important than everything else and than all other life and that does not make sense and it is wrong.)
These don't sound like the kinds of problems programmers solve. Users don't want to customize their UI (well some do), they want a UI that is adapted to their needs. They only want to customize it when it doesn't meet their needs (for example, if a corporation tries to use addicting features or hide things they need to increase engagement).

Accounting software has to be validated, and part of the appeal is that it simplified and consolidates workflows across huge bureaucracies. I don't see how on earth you can just spit one out from a prompt and expect that to replace anything.

I work on a compression algorithm myself, and I've found AI of limited utility. It does help me translate things for interfacing between languages and it can sometimes help me try out ideas, but I have to write almost everything myself.

EDIT: It is true, that lower skilled jobs are going to change or reduce in quantity in the short term. To a certain degree there might be a Jevon's paradox in terms of code quantity that needs management.

Imagine companies churning out tons and tons of code that no one understands that behaves bizzarely. Maybe it will become a boutique thing for companies to have code that works properly and people will just accept broken user interfaces or whatever so long as there are workarounds.
I guess you could say the s3 compatible services are no longer s3 compatible. But don't update your client and give them a sec to update
Probably the same as it ever was. I couldn't tell you what that is, but it never had anything to do with economics anyway.

Having a job has always been a necessary evil. If the time is coming when that changes, all the better. If we can't figure out how to behave in the presence of plenty, we don't deserve utopia anyway.
What do you expect for $50?

And at the end of it's life, the local Base Exchange was selling them for $50 along with a $99 rebate voucher. The offer didn't last for long, though my brother scrabbled enough cash to buy 5 of them, got the rebate checks and wound up making money on the deal. But then he had 5 99/4As that he couldn't even give away.

It was a bit of a crap-fest handicapped by bizarre corporate strategies from TI and a "baroque" internal architecture. But it was DURT CHEAP compared to "real" computers like PCs/clones, Apple ][s or CP/M devices.

(Not arguing with the fact that in 1983 when TI pulled out of the market, it was clear it was ready to move to a computer farm upstate. But none of us knew any better in '79 when the 99/4 was originally released. And besides, BILL COSBY was the spokes-person, so it COULDN'T be a bad machine!)
Provisional hires (which often exist in theory but they're pretty much a formality in general) don't work for the most part. Lot of overhead for the company. And in many cases you're asking for the candidate to quit a job and possibly relocate on the possibility they'll get a new position assuming that they click in a short time interval.
We are adding 1 trillion dollars to the deficit every 100 days.
I can’t speak to images

But I’ve noticed the way people respond to ambiguous statements reveals a lot about their internal state

(Eg do they assume you’re well-intentioned, assume mal-intent, default to status games, etc)

So I could see the image assessment working in theory if not in application
I will pass this on to the general, he appreciates the intel.
Useful redress for a bureaucracy taking lawful actions within the guidelines specified is never "let's fire the civil servant". They're not out to enact their agenda, they're trying their level best to achieve the goals set.

(Same way firing L3s doesn't help with execs setting a bad direction)

If that work is nowhere close to the perceived will of the people (again, please, let's not debate "what's the actual will though"), it's a failure of executive and legislative to create clarity.

You're right, ultimately this is about legislative and/or executive having conversations with experts to set the right goals and guidelines.

But you'll need it to be a conversation, and you need to leave room for independent decisions within a larger framework. The EO does squash all discussion or feedback down to "president's always right, ask the president". This makes redress harder, not easier.

Centralized command and control looks appealing because it simplifies a lot of things, but it breaks down because it assumes a single person has all the answers.

And this particular EO makes it worse, because it also directs agencies to ignore judicial decisions unless the president says so. Maybe. The writing's very unclear: "No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law, including but not limited to the issuance of regulations, guidance, and positions advanced in litigation, unless authorized to do so by the President or in writing by the Attorney General."

What's "positions advanced in litigation"? Does it include injunctions/restraining orders? If it does, there is no judicial redress at all. Which means accountability is reduced, not increased.

I don't disagree with you that there need to be limits to regulatory authority of a bureaucracy. But this EO is very much not it.
Yeah plus the whole they eat things I can't and turn it into something I can eat.
I would generalize it to a compiler produces some sort of artifact that is intended to later be used directly, while for an interpreter the whole mechanism(source to execution) is intended to be used directly.

The same tool can often be used to do both. trival example: a web browser. save your web page as a pdf? compiler. otherwise interpreter. but what if the code it is executing is not artisanal handcrafted js but the result of a typescript compiler?