dTal

That USA government - the mythical "deep state" one with all sorts of hyper-competent stuff happening behind closed doors - is dead. To the extent that it ever existed, Trump credits himself with killing it.

I found this article confusingly written, so I'll summarize:

A health insurance cartel is asserting that AI-enhanced diagnostic assistance tools (such as medical record scanning or ambient voice transcription during consultations) is resulting in an increase in diagnosed "secondary conditions" without a corresponding increase in treatment of those conditions. Despite being untreated, these secondary conditions still cost the insurers money because they allow doctors to label a medical case as "complex".

That's not what you said. You implied it's simply in the nature of the Middle East to be fighting religious wars, and that is why you are hopeless.

In fact, the aggressors in this case are European colonists, only 3rd generation or so, and they are pretty much following the standard historical playbook for how European colonists treat locals, including the assumed divine right of genocide ("manifest destiny") The Middle East isn't an especially belligerent place otherwise.

So I call your characterization unfair.

Who says it's deprecated? If it's the same people who think my Ethernet port should be called "enp0s31f6" instead of "eth0", then I'm afraid I do not respect their authority...

So to summarize your argument:

Pleasant job (like art) = bad pay

Unpleasant job = good pay (to compensate).

It's a good start, but broadly speaking it seems to me that job fulfillment is correlated positively with compensation: there are an awful lot of unpleasant jobs that also have terrible pay, and conversely jobs that are considered important to society (and hence gratifyingly fulfilling) tend to be well compensated also.

So at the very least there's something else going on.

>as I understand it there was really only ONE up and running at that time in 1948

As a matter of interest, "that time" being April, it was only two months later in June that the Manchester Baby ran its first stored program.

This page reliably hangs Firefox 155 at 100% CPU for me.

Exactly why their removal from the loop is frightening.

Uh does this mean any Bluetooth device can be tracked from orbit? The physics seems impossible...

I'm confused. They already "work with leading AI companies", manifestly failed to maintain containment ("highlighting the problem Irregular is trying to solve"), and somehow they're playing it as a win?

I never claimed that what I did was comparable to these modern options - I didn't validate it in more than an ad-hoc way anyway, and it used an off-the-shelf LLM rather than something specially trained. I didn't consider it worth releasing or making a big fuss of.

I contribute my experience here only because I've seen a lot of chatter lately about doing exactly this sort of thing, and I thought I'd share how I made it work for me. There are a lot of ways it can silently fail and give bad numbers if you aren't careful, and I wouldn't want people to think it doesn't work just because they used a vibe coded GitHub project from the last 48 hours that doesn't take these things into account.

I don't think that's the source of the bias I saw. I am confident that my prompting strategy eliminated attempts to generate long form content - specifically, I took care to wrap (A) and (B) in parentheses, so the completion looked like "Answer: (" - with this scheme an LLM is very unlikely to want to write "Answer: (A sentence goes here...". I know this, quantitatively, because I reliably got 99% distribution coverage with only A+B - that is, no inclination to write "The" or other common sentence starter. That's the beauty of the scheme - you can pretty directly and quantitatively validate how well the LLM understood the instructions. You expect it to only output A or B - so does it?

Meanwhile, the bias could be as much as 70% in favor of A in ambiguous cases - a signal completely drowning the <1% inclination to violate the format.

The whole point is the quantified output. If you just ask an LLM to type out its confidence "manually", it'll make up some nonsense. The logprob numbers are more reliable.

I got this technique to work extremely reliably last year. However there were a bunch of caveats: 1) Firstly, you must institute a check that the multiple choice tokens dominate the output distribution. They should sum to 95% or more, ideally 99%, or the LLM is not following instructions properly. This is also the problem with constrained decoding - if the LLM really doesn't want to output a valid answer, the one you extract will not be high quality. 2) You need to ask it multiple times, permuting which option corresponds to which letter, and average the results. LLMs are surprisingly biased towards picking "A", especially if they're otherwise not sure. 3) For the same reason, performance improves if you frame the prompt as if it were the middle of a quiz. "Question 1" carries baggage that "Question 12" doesn't. 4) You must be exceedingly careful with tokenization.

But when all was said and done, I got a general purpose A/B classifier that gave high resolution quantitative output for the cost of a couple dozen tokens ingested and a couple inference passes.

Hey, me too :) I made myself one of those T25/T480 Frankenpads. But I'll probably use it until I spill coffee on the keyboard, because the mod cost the earth and everything except the keyboard is replaceable (and indeed, everything except the motherboard and bottom case has been replaced).

Bad luck about your USB port. At least replacement T480 motherboards are not scarce!

Ah yes, he "even talked to them". You don't think that perhaps therefore Edward Snowden might've had a better conception of the viability of "the proper channels" than you do?

And, before you answer that too hastily - have you ever heard of William Binney? How about Thomas Drake? Do you know what happened when they used "the proper channels"? If so, your failure to mention them when discussing Snowden's motivation is in bad faith. If not, you're simply not informed enough to be coming into threads speaking authoritatively about this.

As loud as possible? That's naive. They would have black bagged him instantly, no trial. In fact a public trial is his only stipulation for voluntary return - that this has been denied should tell you everything.

It's still great advice :)

Heh. Even a riced T480 can have all that, except the CPU.

Why download from izzysoft.de when you can download from github? https://github.com/yjeanrenaud/yj_nearbyglasses/releases

Note to lazy skimmers: this is not ZuckOff (which is a cash grab slop fest) but the app whose idea it stole - a hand coded, opensource equivalent with no trackers or in-app purchases.

That argument applies to all software. Yet we still run software locally - not just commodity software either, but even complicated, heavy, niche software like Ansys Workbench. Sovereignty has quite a lot of value, it seems.

There is a wide range between "medical procedure" and "bizzare kink". Most of the world can handle a nipple. Hell, babies suck on em. It's disturbing how repressed attitudes are being exported from the US.

The funny thing about Instagram is that it's both:

1) One the most prudish social networks, in the West at least

2) The primary funnel to OnlyFans

I checked Wikipedia, it says in the first paragraph that there's a 427 acre compound in upstate New York. Not bad for "no organisation". (It also contradicts your narrative about why CCP doesn't like them)

None of those people are remotely right wing. Christopher Hitchens was outright Marxist. All believe(d) in liberal, progressive values, which is precisely where their objections to theocracy came from. If you terminate your thoughts at "religion bad = intolerance = right wing" then I am afraid you will be led to severely misguided conclusions.

Parent is correct, by the way - New Atheism turned into Woke. Here's a very thorough treatment: https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/10/30/new-atheism-the-godles...

I wouldn't be so sure about that. 95% of the population will starve to death, global supply chains will collapse, and the world will regress to a pre-industrial-revolution lifestyle - with the critical difference that all shallow oil and coal deposits have been mined out, not to mention many other resources. You're going to have a very tough time bootstrapping it all again. All vital knowledge for running a modern civilization will be lost - most of it isn't even written down now, but is instead implicit in distributed social structures which will all be destroyed. They won't re-form quickly either - travel will be even more risky than in the Dark Ages thanks to fallout. Even a healthy society can coast in a mostly steady state for thousands of years without technological takeoff, and we've had several civilizations in the past who seemed to hold most of the pieces - empiricism, healthy economy transcending food production, precision metalworking - and yet never seemed to quite get there. This won't even be that - it's a restart in a world depleted of natural resources and blighted by death, radiation, mass extinction, and climate change.

I don't think we get a second shot.

> I personally can go on and on and on about how awesome it is that systemd offers workload isolation, least privileges, cgroups for juggling priorities. I love that mdns kind of just works for me, and integrates well with my resolver.

So.... mDNS works out of the box on any glibc system with libnss-mdns and a running avahi-daemon - not "kind of" works, just Works. cgroups are a kernel feature that is quite straightforward to use without systemd. "Workload isolation" and "least privileges" are vague but seem to me to just be describing cgroups again, or just general permissions. I realize that this was an off the cuff remark, not a blog post in defense of systemd, but you must know that every time a systemd skeptic reads a list like this, full of "features" that work fine without it, the impression is only further reinforced that what systemd really provides is marketing.

Well, yes. Why would there be? It's a piece of software designed to turn all distros into Red Hat, and then sell consulting services to manage the untameable complexity. Legibility, composability, these would defeat the purpose.

Your mistake is framing this as "skynet vs unified human resistance led by john connor". In reality it's "human players in the existing class war suddenly curb stomped by software".

Think less "skynet" and more "a corporation without any humans in it". What defends it from physical attack? Same things that defend Google from physical attack now. Everything that AI will make worse, we already have. AI just supercharges it, lets it scale, lets it run without even the inconvenience of suppressed empathy (if it doesn't seem like that's constrained corporations much so far, let's see how deep the rabbit hole goes without any humans in the loop).

There won't be a human resistance. There may be people who resist, but the police will arrest them. Existing power structures will continue to be neatly and elegantly coopted. Extinction doesn't look like HKs roaming the landscape, it looks like human survivability simply being economically untenable in the economy of tomorrow.

>And yeah, LLMs likely will exacerbate the problem. But at its core, the problem is the humans

Ah yes - LLMs don't kill people, people kill people.

Cold comfort!

As with Hacker News, the existence of a web forum that anyone can create an account on does not imply the lack of a socially and geographically centralized ruling elite.