skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In a Lisp implementation, I could use unique, zero sized objects to implement symbols. The gensym function would create a new one.

Zero-sized distinguishable objects can have properties attached to them via hashes. At the API level, you cannot tell how a property (e.g. symbol-name) is attached to an object.

Properties, like the symbol name, would be attached to these objects via hashes.

It's not an ideal representation for symbols when all symbols have a certain property, like name.

If you have objects such that they have certain properties, but the properties are rare (only a few objects have a value of the property that requires storing space, and for the rest it is some "undefined" value, you can achieve a sparse representation by making the objects as small as possible, attaching the properties externally.
Is there any public documentation on modern branch prediction algorithms? I know branch prediction is very important to modern CPU so SOTA techniques are probably not public... But it's really amazing what it can do especially considering the "limited" cache sizes that branch predictors have .
It's also interesting to notice how often comedies are also tragedies.

My favorite modern example is Dumb and Dumber. If you remove the comedic timing and absurdity, it's a depressing story! By the end, Harry and Lloyd are destitute and stranded halfway across the country. They have no hopes and no prospects. Everything they tried to accomplish ended in failure. Neither got the girl in the end; the girl, in fact, was never available to be got in the first place. And in the closing scene, they reject their final lifeline because they're too dumb to recognize it.
I use gnome authenticator on desktop/laptop. Quite happy with it though it does have a few annoying bugs, but quite usable
Perfect move by Mozilla. Kudos.
Is this the guy who tweets all day and gets in online fights?
Do you have any evidence to suggest that LLMs have increased productivity in software? And if so what is the effect size?

I don’t really see any increase in the quality, velocity, creativity of software I’m either using or working on, but I have seen a ton of candidates with real experience flunk out on interviews because they forget the basics and blame it on LLMs. I’ve honestly never seen candidates struggle with syntax the way I’m seeing them do so the last couple years.

I find LLMs very useful for general overviews of domains but I’ve not really seen any use that is a clear unambiguous boost to productivity. You still have to read the code and understand it which takes time, but “vibe coding” prevents you from building cognitive load until that point, making code review costly.

I feel like a lot of the hype in this space so far is aspirational, pushed by VCs, or a bunch of engineers who aren’t A/B testing: like for every hour you spend rubber ducking with an LLM, how much could you have gotten thought out with a pen and paper? In fact, usually I can go and enjoy my life more without an LLM: I write down the problem I’m considering and then go on a walk, and come back and have a mind full of new ideas.
I been thinking about something similar for a long time now. I think abstraction of patterns is at the core requirement of intelligence.

But whats critical, and I think is what's missing is a knowledge representation of events in space-time. We need something more fundamental than text or pixels, we need something that captures space and transformations in space itself.
i don't see how a "militantly open source" project can be released under a (4-year!) BSL
youtube link if you want to watch the interaction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roEsJcQYjd8
> System Design interviews

System Design interviews can be crammed too.

I'd find it much better if people would ask you "tell me about some complicated systems you helped build and what high-level challenged you encountered". Instead you get "how would you design google docs?".
I deleted the part of my comment you quoted. Sorry about that.

I agree with you, FWIW.
Coolify is much more feature rich and well maintained with a clear open source license.
Exactly what problems did you have?
This implies significant deflation, $7.25/hr locks you out of traditional rental market and property ownership and access to foods beyond the cheapest staples.

You'd be looking at >60hr weeks doing physical labor and living hand to mouth in extreme poverty to sort of stay above water unless everything drops in price by an order of magnitude.

The implication that there will not be a massive drop in quality of life and workplace environments is difficult to reconcile with the seemingly-required impacts of massive deflation in real estate assets and commodity prices.
It’s not like I said it was 100%. 55/45 or even 67/33 is pretty noisy and will fail a lot. Still beats 50/50.
Coding is over. Post concludes with author writing better code, concluding coding is not over, simply developers have better tools available to assist them.

And please take a look at my website - C:\Users\p_ing\www\index.html

Let me know what you think!
More likely the 110V means you need twice as much copper
>LeCun is directing an AI lab that [built LLMs]

No he's not.
LLMs learn from examples where the logits are not probabilities, but how a given sentence continues (only one token is set to 1). So they don't learn probabilities, they learn how to continue the sentence with a given token. We apply softmax at the logits for mathematical reasons, and it is natural/simpler to think in terms of probabilities, but that's not what happens, nor the neural networks they are composed of is just able to approximate probabilistic functions. This "next token" probability is the source of a lot misunderstanding. It's much better to imagine the logits as "To continue my reply I could say this word, more than the others, or maybe that one, a bit less, ..." and so forth. Now there are evidences, too, that in the activations producing a given token the LLM already has an idea about how most of the sentence is going to continue.

Of course, as they learn, early in the training, the first functions they will model, to lower the error, will start being the probabilities of the next tokens, since this is the simplest function that works for the loss reduction. Then gradients agree in other directions, and the function that the LLM eventually learn is no longer related to probabilities, but to the meaning of the sentence and what it makes sense to say next.

It's not be chance that often the logits have a huge signal in just two or three tokens, even if the sentence, probabilistically speaking, could continue in much more potential ways.
> And let's be clear — the US did not "lose a war" in Afghanistan or Iraq. Yes, we had failed pseudo-occupations. That is not the same as losing a war.

You do not wage war for the sake of war, war is a tool for achieving political goals. What you're saying is that the U.S. won battles in these wars, but ultimately lost because they failed to achieve their political objectives — which were the very reasons the wars were started in the first place. They lost in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. They lost all of these wars.
Because he has a core belief and based on that core belief he made some statements that turned out to be incorrect. But he kept the core belief and adjusted the statements.

So it's not so much about his incorrect predictions, but that these predictions were based on a core belief. And when the predictions turned out to be false, he didn't adjust his core beliefs, but just his predictions.

So it's natural to ask, if none of the predictions you derived from your core belief come true, maybe your core belief isn't true.
Getting Amazon and k8s certifications will mean nothing with tools like this
> Here’s what I always remind myself about this current government: It is really the worst ideas conflated together, but it was that, or elect leftists in power.

There were basically no leftists running under any major party banner for any federal office in the US, and the small number of arguable center-leftists doing so in the general election were mostly incumbents, and mostly reelected.

It was not, in fact, a choice between leftists and what we got, it was a choice between the center-right corporate capitalist wing of the Democratic Party and what is, at best, lawless kleptocracy and at worst outright fascism.
It was flattering for a nanosecond, and then you realize 4o will call almost anything “insightful” or “profound.”
But it provides the necessary training so humanity can be brought back from extinction at the end of Trump's term.
Kicking the can down the road to avoid a recession—like Obama dis with quantitative easing or Biden did with massive deficit spending—hasn’t proven to be a good idea.
Algebraic data types are superb for compilers. Case exhaustiveness checks are really helpful in this domain, especially when doing any sort of semantic analysis.

Frankly, I try to avoid languages that don’t have ADTs as much as possible. They are incredibly useful for specifying invariants via your design, and their constraints on inputs lend themselves to easier implementation and maintenance.
Thanks for the suggestion, that was really fun. One I've been really enjoying in the same vein is https://raddle.quest
Just worked through a lot of the puzzles. I love the concept, and I also like how the timer doesn't reset when you switch between them.

3 pieces of feedback:

1. Since your time matters, a start button before a new puzzle is presented would be nice.

2. I wanted to play more puzzles but didn't realize the calendar button up top switched puzzles till reading comments. I think fading the screen with an overlay with the existing buttons and adding a "Play Another?" button would hook people in more.

3. Some of the scrambles are too easy. Maybe that's by design, but an example is "PAWSN" in the apr 4th chess puzzle, it's stupidly obvious compared to the other words.

But again really awesome content and would make an amazing mobile website or app.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Oxidation_Event#Hypothes...
That was an analogy to explain the simile. Homily? Anyhow, we're personifying information to make a statement on how people communicate. People naturally want to share information. We self-organize around the idea.
There's no need for real names, what is needed is that you can't create multiple accounts. This can be done without linking identities by using two unrelated parties. Party A is the platform and B is the authenticator, when creating an account on A you are sent to B to authenticate your identity and get a token to finish your account creation on A. As long as A and B are separate, A never knows the identity of the user and B doesn't know what the user represents himself on A.
He should care principally about his customers. That's it.
Exception to Laws of Thermodynamics
Surely there are nano technology applications for this discovery?
Could you share how you pick each day's words?
Glad to find a musician here with this problem, as I suspect there are many. The moment I wake up, a song starts playing. When I practice violin, it gets pretty bad.
>I don't know, but feel free to use a search engine.

I did. I didn't find any. I don't think there are. You made the assertion, so, I thought you might know some.
Noah’s article has a whole headline that says:

> A trade deficit is like buying stuff with a credit card

Yeah—that’s exactly why it’s bad! That’s why very smart and responsible countries like Japan and Germany seek to maintain trade surpluses.
If I'm in the market for Heroku, why would I want to self-host anything?
Haha I was thinking you might describe the decisionmaking involved in having a multinational defensive alliance invade a nuclear power.

Instead you decided to use it as an opportunity to claim that the Russian-occupied territories should be internationally recognized. You're funny.
[Hi from Argentina!] LLM have a particular style that will make people suspictious or even angry.

One posibility is to write the answer in Korean and use autotranslation. (And post only the autotranslation.) Double check the technical terms, because autotranslation sometimes choose the wrong synonym.

Another posibility is to write the answer in English inside gmail, and gmail will highlight orthographical and gramar errors. So you can fix them.

Most people here will tolerate a few mistakes if the answer has your own personal style.

(Nice project, by the way.)
Bah, thanks for the correction.
I believe so, tried to access but wasn't able
> People naturally want to share information. We self-organize around the idea.

Except we don’t. We heavily filter and censor what we share for a variety of reasons. When people freely share their every thought you get Twitter, not civilisation.
In many ways, a half-truth is worse than a simple lie, and there is no guarantee all parties are wrong in their own way:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Poems_of_John_Godfrey_Sax...

Media tends to interview the most outrageous looking imbecile they can find at any event... regardless of political affiliation. The Sinclair Broadcast Group helps local news maintain consistent messaging, and thus any mistakes intentional or not are less noticeable.

Fact-checking is only as good as the data sources people find. There are groups that ran entire fake scientific journals to sell the public outright nonsense.

Verifiable facts are difficult to validate. "AI"/LLM slop content just made it worse =3
To a further extent, I know people who can't meditate or just stare at a wall for a few minutes, they must always be working or consuming or engaged in something
>You don't agree, but does that better address the problem you raised?

No, because you still aren't addressing the underlying point. Protesting is protected speech. Protesting in response to speech is therefore also protected speech despite it being a consequence. You are refusing to engage with this simple example that shows the inherent contradiction of your philosophy.
> "We're making the mother of all omelettes here, can't fret over every egg!"

At nearly US$ 6/dozen:

* https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU0000708111

yes, Americans can. :)
> a tool allowing job candidates to commit fraud

It's not fraud.

The candidate could also use this tool to help with the job once they've been hired, and that would not be fraud either.

They wouldn't, but that's just because the interview is stupid and not like real work.
LLMs for OCR is super risky because just as much as they can fix OCR mistakes, they can inadvertently "fix" correct stuff too and hallucinate instead.

Its that xerox bug on steroids, where scanned pages would get their digits swapped by other digits...

I'd want to see some proper hallucination analysis.
How many days before the invasion did Russia claim to have no plans to invade?
Cluster of Massachusetts nurses reportedly diagnosed with brain tumors
> As LLMs do things thought to be impossible before

Like what?

Your timeline doesn't sound crazy outlandish. It sounds pretty normal and lines up with my thoughts as AI has advanced over the past few years. Maybe more conservative than others in the field, but that's not a reason to dismiss him entirely any more than the hypesters should be dismissed entirely because they were over promising and under delivering?

> Now reasoning models can solve problems they never saw

This is not the same as a novel question though.

> o3 did huge progresses on ARC

Is this a benchmark? O3 might be great, but I think the average person's experience with LLMs matches what he's saying, it seems like there is a peak and we're hitting it. It also matches what Ilya said about training data being mostly gone and new architectures (not improvements to existing ones) needing to be the way forward.

> LeCun is directing an AI lab that as the same point has the following huge issues

Second point has nothing to do with the lab and more to do with Meta. Your last point has nothing to do with the lab at all. Meta also said they will have an agent that codes like a junior engineer by the end of the year and they are clearly going to miss that prediction, so does that extra hype put them back in your good books?
Who is doing something, and how they're doing it, can be as important as what is being done.
Many stability improvements and a new UI/UX are coming soon.
the counterpoint is that a lot of those 20 instructions are also branches
It’s wild to me that hair regrowth could be considered an unworthy goal, when hundreds of millions of people will get an enormous boost to their well-being and all kinds of psych issues.
It may actually be more effective a depression treatment than a good portion of anti-depressants.
Saying that sanctions helped the Russian economy is an absolutely wild claim to make, and not one I have seen made from a single credible source.

Double digit inflation despite a central bank baseline rate of over 20% is absolutely terrible. GDP numbers are only staying up because their government is spending a massive amount on the millitary and running huge deficits. The situation is very bad and getting worse. Millions of prime age workers have been pulled from productive work to supply the army and serve as assault troops. Hundreds of thousands have been killed or disabled.

The soviet stockpile drawdowns appear to have peaked which will put even more strain on the system. Nobody knows when the system will collapse but it will get there sooner or later without some major changes.
It's QEMU based i think that corellium are using their proprietary hypervisor
Might be the first large-scale application of AI technology to geopolitics
The idolatry and drama surrounding LeCun, Hinton, Schmidhuber, etc. is likely a distraction. This includes their various predictions.

More interesting is their research work. JEPA is what LeCun is betting on:

https://ai.meta.com/blog/v-jepa-yann-lecun-ai-model-video-jo...
"Build your word here" really confused me. I thought that was a text box that I was supposed to activate.
> chemistry happening in the upper atmosphere

That's not a concern for the idea I linked, which restricts itself to the lower atmosphere, using nothing more than seawater.
Humans as a species don’t value conservation. Individual humans. The total removal of human beings is still the best form of conservation.
The experience of the author is 100% similar to mine with the same conclusions and with the same age brackets it's eerie.
I agree about SwiftUI. It's something I want to like, but everything about it… no.

For me, SwiftUI does exactly two things better than UIKit: tables and collection views. For everything else, it's so much easier to get stuff done with UIKit*, regardless of if I'm working with Interface Builder or making UI in code (as per various projects I've dropped into).

In theory, reactive UI is good. In practice, at least in the case of SwiftUI, the "magic" data passing does sometimes fail — perhaps someone put in the wrong @ on the property — and then you've got to debug some weird magic, and if there's a sensible place to put a breakpoint for that kind of problem I have yet to learn it.

In theory, the UI is reusable across all Apple platforms. In practice, the nature of the user experience is so different that actually trying this makes it suck for everyone — you don't want finger-sized buttons on a mouse-driven UI or tiny mouse-suitable click areas for a mobile UI, and I have no idea what the user expectations are for tvOS or WatchOS despite having written apps for both because hardly anyone shares their experiences and lessons learned.

In theory, having the code be the source of truth for the WYSIWYG editor is great. In practice, the WYSIWYG editor keeps giving up because of e.g. a compiler error, and decides to stop forever until you manually resume the preview.

* I'm mostly on iOS rather than macOS, but I'd assume UIKit and AppKit have the same strengths and weaknesses.
Given that the OpenType font format is Turing-complete [0], I would challenge the “without code” claim. ;)

[0] https://litherum.blogspot.com/2019/03/addition-font.html
> In fact, pattern-matching is all there is: That's a bear, run away; I'm in a restaurant, I need to order; this is like a binary tree, I can solve it recursively.

This is not correct. It does not explain creativity at all. It cannot solely be based on pattern matching. I'm not saying no AI is creative, but this logic does not explain creativity
Did you read the article? What would that even help
Great Question (YC W21) Is Hiring Applied AI Engineers
From what I can see, Madagascar in 2024 had a trade deficit with the US of about $700 million and had total imports of about $5.4 billion. It's feasible that they might prefer to transfer 13%[0] of their current imports to sources from the USA even if it's more expensive since being able to export more cheaply to the USA would be a net gain.

0. Actually less than this since there's a floor of a 10% tariffs. They can have deficit/imports of up to 20% before they incur a penalty.
What a funny question :)
Ahrefs, Bloomberg, Meta are the ones that come to mind
You thought there might be a sports team called the Loins?
Archived copy

https://archive.is/JbtH8
Maybe it displays oddly on your phone but all I’ve seen is effusive praise for how the landing page is constructed. The graphic is meaningless but the information around it is informative. The graphic itself is meant to inspire rather than inform.
I spent several seconds trying to click on the "Build your word here" box to put the cursor there
Meta can be sued in Kenya over posts related to Ethiopia violence, court rules
I’d love to see that.
Yeah, same thing with his Final Architecture series, promising but in the end middling. Great alien/synthetic mind concepts, but as the story goes on most of them behave just like humans except with funny ways of talking. Tchaikovsky's concepts are amazing, but he needs to pair up with another author who's better at aliens as characters.
I don't think the difference is material, between "they learn probabilities" Vs "they learn how they want a sentence to continue". Seems like an implementation detail to me. In fact, you can add a temperature, set it to zero, and you become deterministic, so no probabilities anywhere. The fact is, they learn from examples of sequences and are very good at finding patterns in those sequences, to a point that they "sound human".

But the point of my response was just that I find it an extremely surprising how well an idea as simple as "find patterns in sequences" actually works for the purpose of sounding human, and I'm suspicious of anyone who pretends this isn't incredible. Can we agree on this?
I personally benefit from AI auto complete when coding. I think that value isn't worth what people say it is. But I'm often wrong about what I think the value of something is (e.g. social media) and it's true value. I unfortunately often have people try to justify their thinking or beliefs by just pasting a ChatGPT output or screenshot to "prove" it.
I actually later like Apple hardware, especially since their model brought Apple-arm development that is completely awesome!
You're painting with an awfully broad brush here. Hedge funds make large directional bets all of the time. Clearly they don't all carefully hedge given how many funds have blown up in past downturns.
How big is the pointed to small integer? With alignment etc. I'm seeing some stuff saying 256 of them would fill an 8KB L1. Plus other stuff for the interpreter might overfill it. Sorted that would be less of an issue.

Larger range one being slower unsorted yes makes sense because of allocation order no longer matching the iteration order.
I love StatsQuest and own this book which I like a lot. However I could not recommend it as a way of ML beyond a surface level. It's a little bit outdated although his NN book, which I've not read, may remedy this.
I grew up being told I was basically doomed. Our generation was inheriting 20% interest rates, resource scarcity, overpopulation, ozone holes, and nuclear war.

I'm tired of it. Somehow we always seem to find a way. It's time to be optimistic.
Since when does USB have error correction/detection?