evdubs

> In principle, an AI learning from a scientific textbook is no different than a human student doing the same.

It's not about the process of building a model. It's about the copyright infringement to acquire the training set and it's about the copyright infringement when producing output. Humans, just like these AI companies, can infringe copyrights by downloading copyrighted material. Humans, just like AI programs, can produce material that is derivative of material protected by copyright. Whatever the model represents and whatever is in your brain is not high on the list of concerns.

He did tick up after the debate, but now Kamala is heavily favored for the Democrats.

https://www.realclearpolling.com/betting-odds/2024/president

Lots of storage to log all of the wash trading on their platform.

I run a Racket program [1] that uses `racket/gui`, `plot`, `db`, etc. and I don't have long startup times when running the main program in a terminal. Maybe you have an example?

[1] https://github.com/evdubs/renegade-way

I use Racket.

> Is any major software using skiplists as a standard ordered container or map?

Java for concurrent navigable maps.

https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/21/docs/api/java.base...

> All Known Implementing Classes: ConcurrentSkipListMap

Balancing binary search trees suffer from lock contention more than skip lists.

Researchers at the Fed agree:

> The case against patents can be summarized briefly: there is no empirical evidence that they serve to increase innovation and productivity

https://files.stlouisfed.org/files/htdocs/wp/2012/2012-035.p...

There are plenty of 5 5 5 women out there. Keep your heads up, gents.

> The problem with learning Lisp is `(a ,b c)

If you can understand "String ${interpolation}", you can understand list quasiquoting.

> But the problem remains: it only takes one wizard to make reading code impossible by outsiders.

This really is a Lisp meme. There are plenty of Lisp wizards like Guy Steele, Rich Hickey, and Matthew Flatt. The wizards perform the magical act of making code legible and intelligible. I have stumbled around several Clojure and Racket code bases and never felt like "I should understand this code but the features of Lisp make it impossible to know for sure." "Infinite power" macros and whatever are really only used sparingly and generally when it's impossible to achieve a goal otherwise. No one is doing (define + -).

> But this means no-one outside of the language/system developers know the language, this means Lisp tends to be write-only by design - not in the line-noise meaning, but in the obscure foreign language meaning.

I, as a Racket novice, have been able to add candlesticks [1] to the plot library without learning much about it. I have also debugged DrRacket (an IDE) to uncover that Racket GUI operations performed significantly worse if non-integer scaling was used [2]. At no point when I was going through Racket internal code did I ever feel it was write-only. In fact, it was quite convenient to modify Racket internal source code, rebuild, and test changes in a way that would be much more difficult in Java or C++.

> You certainly can not do that, but if you choose to not do that, why pick Lisp?

Built in rationals.

The ergonomics of defining [XML / JSON / etc] data as S-expressions and doing things like pattern matching on that data.

Great, coherent integration between GUIs, plots, statistics functions, and all the other bits of Racket's batteries inclusions.

You still have access to all the other great features that other languages have borrowed from Lisp like REPL development, package managers (edit: maybe package managers were not a Lisp invention), good IDE tools, etc.

It is nice to learn the meta-syntax of parentheses once and know that the code will always look like that. No need to consider if some feature is implemented as a syntactically different new keyword, annotation, function call, or whatever. It'll always be a (feature).

> something you have to conciously work for with Lisp.

Plenty of languages have style guides, linters, static analysis tools, etc. to make sure the code conforms to certain restrictions. Lisp feels no different in this regard.

[1] https://docs.racket-lang.org/plot/renderer2d.html#%28def._%2...

[2] https://github.com/racket/gui/commit/20e589c091998b0121505e2...

I sort of evaluated Typed Racket before I started writing lots of Racket code, and my experience was that "Contract" Racket (regular non-Typed Racket) was more ergonomic and idiomatic. I think the contract system is great and I use it, for example, when sending messages to Interactive Brokers:

https://github.com/evdubs/interactive-brokers-api/blob/maste...

This file just includes request message definitions and to-string (->string) implementations.

The overall program's performance is adequate for me, so if the contract system is causing overhead, I don't particularly care about it. Maybe that's a scalability concern for more performance-demanding programs which could benefit from Typed Racket.

> Racket is the best for a beginner, but it keeps having that academic, "we made it for the kids" feel of being easy to understand but not very pragmatic for a seasoned programmer. And it is one of a kind, so a good Racket developer might never know Lisp itself.

I find Racket to be more pragmatic than Java, Python, and JavaScript. So much so that I trade options with it. Edit: "pragmatic" not for all things, but for many things, including GUIs and charts. Second edit: whoops. I see I've already pointed out this Racket program to you.

https://github.com/evdubs/renegade-way

> Because it's weird enough to be off-putting, and it doesn't solve a real-world problem.

Nonsense. Quoth Wikipedia, "Lisp pioneered many ideas in computer science, including tree data structures, automatic storage management, dynamic typing, conditionals, higher-order functions, recursion, the self-hosting compiler, and the read–eval–print loop." These are all solutions to real world problems.

So many languages borrow features that were originally developed in Lisp.

> However, this flexibility is also a massive footgun: if you're not careful your junior developer might end up reinventing the wheel a dozen times, and writing completely unmaintainable code in the process.

Plenty of code written in Lisp looks just like your Python, Ruby, JavaScript, Java, et al programs where you're defining structures or classes, writing and calling functions, importing useful libraries, etc. Plenty of this Lisp code is just as maintainable as the non-S-expression code.

> Anyone who knows C# will be able to pick up a basic understanding of C, Python, or JavaScript well within a day

Same with Lisp. It's just:

(function arg1 arg2)

Instead of

function(arg1, arg2)

> You want code which is quick and easy to write, trivial to read, and understandable by even the worst programmer in your company.

There is plenty of "lowest common denominator" code like this written in Lisp. Much Lisp code is not buried under inscrutable macros, just like not all Java code is buried under layers of inscrutable classes.

That's what the attestation is. BDO, a top 5 accounting network, confirms that Tether has the assets they claim to have.

If you believe there is more fraud in the securities markets than there is in the Bitcoin markets, I have some stolen North Korean Bitcoin to sell you.

Where did he give that impression?

> hedge funds use dark pools to make non-public trades, ensure fund liquidity, equity, lie, cheat, steal; etc.

No one is using dark pools to "lie, cheat, steal, etc." Plenty of market participants (including retail) use dark pools for goals like price improvement or sophisticated order handling like TWAP orders. Dark pools would not be possible without the lit markets that we all know and enjoy. All of these dark pool executions are reported to FINRA.

BDO Italia attests that Tether has their money. https://tether.to/en/transparency/#reports

The Chairman and CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, a primary dealer and banking partner for Tether, says Tether has their money.

Deltec bank, a banking partner for Tether, says Tether is fully backed by reserves. https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/01/22/tethers-bank-de...

That's not convincing?

The SEC lawsuit, which alleges (among other things) Binance as having lots of wash trading on their platform, still hasn't been resolved.

Using statistical methods, for BTC, ETH, LTC, and XRP, Binance wash trading was estimated at >50%.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w30783

You can see other pairs on Binance that are clearly more. For example, GAS is the 9th "most traded" token on Binance. It claims ~$100M in daily volume, but there's not even $1M in liquidity between +/- 2% of spot. That is almost certainly all wash trading.

https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/binance

Binance volume numbers are not believable.

Feels pretty green charging an EV at home with solar panels.

Copyright infringement is about making a copy. It is not making a copy if you read a book. It is not making a copy if you watch TV. It is not making a copy if you listen to the radio. If Denys makes a video/audio file of himself quoting a large segment from "Friends", that's copyright infringement.

When machines train on a corpus of data, that corpus data is a copy and is almost certainly infringing on copyright (depending on how they acquired it). When machines use their training model and reproduce verbatim copyrighted works that they've been trained with, that copy is infringing (depending on licenses they acquired to reproduce copyrighted data).

You seem to be arguing that downloading copyrighted material without permission is not copyright infringement. "Acquire 'unlicensed' copies" is exactly downloading without permission. You are making a copy, thus infringing on the author's copyright.

If you bought the books and screenplays, you acquired them in a way that doesn't infringe on copyright. If you borrowed them from the library, you acquired them in a way that doesn't infringe on copyright. You don't need a license because you aren't republishing.

ML training doesn't work without having a copy of the data (books and screenplays). That data can either be copied in a non-infringing way (buy the books; acquire a license) or in an infringing way (download the books from a corpus without explicit permission like these AI companies are accused of doing). LLM services need a license just like Facebook, Instagram, etc. need a license to republish the stuff you post. The copyright holder maintains their copyright and the service that republishes their work (Facebook, Instagram, etc.) or publishes derivative works (AI) needs a license.

Did you, through copyright infringement, acquire your copies of Harry Potter? Did you use Harry Potter source material and a machine to transform the input and produce your parody material?

I think it's different if OpenAI acquires licenses for all of the material it uses for training.

With Racket:

* I really enjoy using numeric towers and it is upsetting to me every time I go to another language where I can't just work with rationals as a default.

* Having statistics functions, a GUI library, and a plot library all part of the standard distribution is wonderful. Dependencies are kept to a minimum, which I appreciate. Everything feels coherent and not over-engineered.

* Poking around in the large standard library was straight forward and not difficult. I added candlesticks [1] to the plot library without understanding much of the plot library's design or implementation details. I think this would have been much more involved in many other languages.

Where I perceive Java as nicer than Racket:

* I wish Racket had real threads like Java. Having futures and places for actual concurrency / parallelism is not as nice.

* I wish Racket had the rich data structures built in as Java has. You need to reach for an external library for a sorted data structure; this is not ideal.

* Java's performance is great and its future is promising. Java already has some great GCs including low pause time GCs, Project Valhalla will add value objects to Java, and Project Loom will enhance the concurrency functionality offered in Java.

I don't have much JavaFX experience, but my perception is that it would be fine and just as "cumbersome" as Racket's GUI and plot libraries.

[1] https://docs.racket-lang.org/plot/renderer2d.html?q=candlest...

Java and JavaFX.

I use Racket (a Scheme) for option trading.

https://github.com/evdubs/renegade-way

The article covers typo resilience in the section "Typo tolerance / fuzzy search".

This adds a step between query entry and text search where you find the similarity of query words to unique lexemes if the word is not a lexeme. Seems like a reasonable compromise to me?

+1 for Racket.

omgmajk, if you care to see some random Racket code/projects, https://github.com/evdubs?tab=repositories&q=&type=source&la... has some stuff to look at.

It seems like the big reveal here is that we can see reports from Tether's banking partners (previously reported at https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidjeans/2023/02/10/tether-re...):

Deltec Bank Portfolio Report: https://downloads.coindesk.com/legal/C1%20Attachment%20A.pdf

Ansbacher Portfolio Report: https://downloads.coindesk.com/legal/C2%20Attachment%20B.pdf

Capital Union Portfolio Report: https://downloads.coindesk.com/legal/C3%20Attachment%20C.pdf

For folks who thought, "The Commercial Paper market is a small market and everyone knows each other; no one claims to know Tether." Here you can see some details about Tether's holdings with Deltec Bank.

The development has stalled since 2021, but the app still works. There is a tiny community picking it up in the wake of the Reddit blackouts.