Commercial offering that's been around a long time - InRule [1].
I don't have any affiliation with them, it was considered for a project I worked on in 2005.
2,576 karma · joined October 15, 2012
E-mail: sixdimensional ATAT [dimensionsix DOT com] minus the ATAT and brackets.
I don't have any affiliation with them, it was considered for a project I worked on in 2005.
I think people started calling it the public cloud simply because of the scale and seemingly easy access to everyone, where the current clouds are seemingly in open competition with each other.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/24107581/doj-v-apple-antitrust-mono...
My feeling is that an equally great “open App Store” that is popular enough does not exist (and if it did, I suspect Apple for example would actively have prevented it from being an option on iOS). Probable Google too for Android? I am not as sure in the second one.. is there an open Android App Store/marketplace/catalog?
Which App Store would we say is the “open” one? I don’t know that one truly exists.. and I feel confident it would be hard work to make such a thing (but it might be worth it).
That doesn’t mean closed marketplaces don’t work - they do, and well (to a point and certain scale) and are necessary, and there is an interplay between the two.
That said, open marketplaces and standards are for certain the superset of closed ones, this is where we get the interplay of public and private.
App stores as a model aren’t necessarily the problem, they are just a distribution model. The control and operation of app stores as they are currently controlled mainly as closed/private could be perceived as an obstacle. But, why not then pursue what an open App Store/marketplace might look like?
I believe the above is like physics, and some may label me a heretic for the strength of my belief in the above.
I truly believe that the sooner humanity advances to this understanding more broadly and we can more easily converse and cooperate in decentralized, federated, open marketplaces as an everyday pursuit, the better off all will be.
The Internet, and me being able to post this right now on the open forum of HN is proof of the value in fully understanding and being comfortable with the concepts.
Not so much talking about the original post, I think it’s awesome what they are building, and clearly they have learned by observing other things.
I feel the question isn't where a tool/idea originates.. it should be, does this tool/idea provide effective, appropriately-priced, accessible, problem-oriented features that target market-derived problems?
Also, there are problems seeking solutions, and solutions seeking problems. It's important to know which case you're looking at. It can be more difficult to be a solution seeking a problem.
I have been both an engineer and a product manager. I built internal tools, and tools for sale externally. When I learned more about formal product management, it made so much more sense where to start.
This is an oversimplification but, if you're doing fundamental R&D or internal tools, and not trying to yet build a publicly facing business, then focus on the purpose you are trying to unlock. If you're trying to build a publicly facing, sustainable business, focus on identifying a market problem, and building problem-oriented features to address them, making those solutions available and visible to those who need them, and acquiring/serving customers.
The beauty of some of this is that, these days it can be possible in some cases to focus on identifying something that is a market problem, make a minimal version of the solution visible with low investment, find out if this is something that makes sense to continue to build, and then iterate rapidly.
A lot of the above is regurgitated "best practices in product management", to be fair, but overall I've found it really helpful guidance.
[1] https://twitter.com/funcOfJoe/status/1319667607214067712
FWIW, I have flirted with my own DSL implementations in a few cases. Certainly, language design is much more complex, but I also felt that once you understand enough of EBNF/parser generators (and some of the simpler alternatives), this is a very powerful option as well.
The interesting part is he could not remember the word for it, but the part of his brain that knew what dementia was, still functioned.
So he would say, "I have that thing that starts with the letter d, where I can't remember things".
I also remember after he passed, going through things in his home, and finding papers and things he had collected, which were his reminders to himself that he had seen in himself that he couldn't remember.
I think for me, one of the most emotional moments I had was finding this poem printed and sitting on his desk: https://www.ellenbailey.com/poems/ellen_112.htm
I still miss him and was in awe of the fact that he was going through the stages of dementia but still remembered me, and was aware of it. I think being aware of it almost made it worse, in my opinion.
It was basically a site that listed all the HTML tags and what they did.
That plus a text editor and early version of Netscape Navigator was all you needed, and you were off to the races to learn and experiment!
So, in compiled binary executables it was not uncommon to include encoded binary resources, like files or images. Not tons of them, because they would explode the size of the executable.
For example, for C or C++ https://github.com/graphitemaster/incbin
So here's the interesting part - we decided to build executables in a way that data in those executables could not be changed (makes sense since it's compiled and the compiled code runs on the machine, and for security reasons).
That said, think about what a container (e.g. docker) is. A running container is kind of like a packaged executable, except it also has a filesystem.
So if you pack data (which can be modified and runtime!) into a container, it's a similar concept to an embedded resource in an executable, except it can change.
Now, in a container, any changes made to data at runtime inside the container won't persist unless the container is given persistent storage.
What I've been wondering lately is why we didn't invent some kind of single "executable plus volatile data space embedded within the executable", so that programs and data (say, a database) could couple together into a single file.
Just a musing but tangentially related to your "baked data" - basically, embedded resources in executables just embeds the encoded data right into an executable.
For scripting languages, of course, we can just make a script file that contains a variable with the encoded data as base64 directly.
For the latter 2, it's only good for relatively small static data of course, but it would be interesting to build tech that somehow lifted that constraint of executables.
The current version of that article states: "There is no absolute amount of data that can be cited. For example, one cannot say that any database with more than 1 TB of data is considered a VLDB. This absolute amount of data has varied over time as computer processing, storage and backup methods have become better able to handle larger amounts of data.[5] That said, VLDB issues may start to appear when 1 TB is approached,[8][9] and are more than likely to have appeared as 30 TB or so is exceeded.[10]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_large_database
[1] https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/api/python/user_guide/p...
There are other hardware options, like Aeros loop studio or even things like Akai MPC One, for example, but these get more complex than just a simple looper.
There are basic looper pedals but I suspect most people want something like an RC202 or RC505 for basic but multitrack simple live looping.
I'm just somebody who has used it a lot, not associated to Ableton in any way.
Another popular DAW for loop-based recording is FL Studio (a little less expensive than Ableton with lifetime free updates and plenty powerful). Also a longtime user of FL.
I understand the relentless need to innovate, do cool stuff, etc., but somewhere along the way a line was crossed.
A good time to throw in the term exnovation.. there's a reason you rarely hear it, but there's a reason somebody came up with it.
As a precursory statement, I do not mean this in any sort of a sci-fi sense, but more of a very literal... intellectual & philosophical curiosity, kind of amazed, slightly perplexed. I apologize if I come across as naive here!
Something I can't get out of my mind - what truly is this thing/what does it represent? I know it's a language model.. but it's more than just a language model.. it gets close to crossing that barrier of the Turing test [2], except that we know it is not actually sentient/intelligent and the Turing test itself is controversial. This bot/language model appears to have protections in place to try to protect me as the user from thinking that it is a human/sentient, in fact. Almost like, we're afraid of that possibility.
What I mean, in the sense of... this could not exist and make sense without human input. Is this level of model only really possible when you have such an enormous set of essentially a huge population of humans as an input (thus why companies collect so much data)? I mean, encoded in this model is some component of human intelligence coming from language.
I mean, even if you didn't need all that data, and you were purely a language based model based on the rules of human grammar - even then, still, the grammar is human language. This thing cannot exist without humans, so it is somehow derived from humanity, but this is not human.
Is this purely a model/algorithm/machine derived from humanity? It seems to be more than that based on this post (which seems to be capable of simulating a running virtual machine inside ChatGPT). Is this potentially defined as an automation of human text/language interaction?
There is a concept (I'm sharing a factual link, but I intend to be non-denominational/neutral/respectful to anyone's religion here) of "God's Algorithm"[3]. Setting aside religious differences, I used to think of an analogous "God's database", which isn't a thing apparently. I'm imagining the superset of data of everything. The algorithm is the encoded functional model of the data. If you somehow had this superset and then compressed it down into a model, it would be a thing that could not exist without both the full data, the processing to evaluate and compress it, the logic for how to compress it and express it, and the system for interacting with that model, and probably a lot of other things.
I think, from a philosophical perspective, this is more than just a language model - because it contains so much human input - even though functionally, according to the developers, it is simply a language model. But I feel deeply there is something more to what it is and I am struggling to find the right description/definition. If it is not AI because it is a model derived from captured human intelligence/text/language data (if intelligence that has meaning to humans is derived from humans), then what is it?
Do we just say, "a very advanced language model"? This, DALL-E, StableDiffusion, etc. etc. - it does feel like there's been a fundamental shift. We may not be at the singularity [4] yet.. but where are we exactly yet? The doorstep?
>>> What do you know about the singularity?
> The singularity is a hypothetical future event in which artificial intelligence and other technologies advance to the point where they fundamentally alter the course of human history. Some people believe that the singularity will be a positive turning point for humanity, while others are more skeptical. Some believe that it could even lead to the extinction of humanity as we know it. At this time, it is not clear exactly when or if the singularity will occur.
>>> Is the existence of advanced language AI model similar to the one I am interacting with proof that we are near to the occurrence of the singularity?
> Not necessarily. The development of advanced language AI models is certainly a significant achievement, but it does not necessarily mean that the singularity is imminent. The singularity is a hypothetical event, and there is no consensus on what exactly it would entail or when it might occur. While some people believe that the singularity is fast approaching, others are more skeptical. Ultimately, only time will tell if the singularity is truly on the horizon.
>>> Describe to me in precise scientific terms, what I am interacting with?
> You are interacting with a large language model trained by OpenAI. This means that the model has been trained on a massive amount of text data and is able to generate human-like responses to a wide range of inputs. While the model is able to generate responses that are similar to those of a human, it is important to remember that it is not actually capable of understanding or comprehending the input in the same way that a human would. It is simply generating text based on its training and the patterns it has identified in the data.
[1] https://about.fb.com/news/2022/08/blenderbot-ai-chatbot-impr...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test
Ascend.io is an end-to-end data automation platform in the cloud. Ascend gives data teams a unified and automated platform to ingest, transform, deliver, observe and orchestrate their entire data engineering and analytics engineering workloads - 10X faster than ever before.
If you eat data, Python, SQL, Go, Java, Scala, Spark, Terraform, AWS, Azure, GCP, etc for breakfast, come revolutionize the data space and ride the rocket ship with us!
Hiring many positions:
- Software/Platform Engineering (SWE) = backend, frontend, full-stack, infrastructure engineers
- Field Engineering = data engineer, solution architect, solution engineer, support & ops engineers
...and others!