hasley

Some questions that bother me:

Are people reviewing all the tests that have been created automatically?

What about existing tests? How do we make sure that AI does not fake them (by silent changes or by faking the test output)?

edit: corrected typo

When I was a child, my dad used to bring me to school by car. During the ride, I played "Star Trek" and we always had a technical issue like a phase variance in an induction coil. Usually it ended such that the warp core had to be ejected...

Sir Patrick Stewart inspired me since my childhood. Thank you captain!

I think there is a general problem:

When you let an LLM write a text for you (source code or some scientific stuff) and then you discuss about changes that you want, the LLM will put some comments in the text related to the conversation These comments will read weird when you do not know the conversation with the LLM. Like: You ask it to make a button read instead of blue and it will at "intentionally made button red here". - Or: The LLM will write that it did not use a certain approach for a derivation or notation just because you asked it to change such things.

You have to explicitly tell the LLM that bit shall only include what has been declared as finalized and that the text (especially prose) shall be self-contained.

Maybe it is hard for an LLM to distinguish the context of the conversation and the context of the text it shall write for you (I mean the abstract context, not the LLM context window).

> The answer was to add as many features to the language as possible.

This is an exaggeration.

For me, C+11/C++14 made the language much more approachable and readable.

It was only that from then on, the language was to be updated regularly.

This may not invalidate your point, but C++11 was a major step forward that, for me, made C++ feel much more convenient and modern than before. And C++14 is basically just adding/fixing stuff that should have been in C++11 in the first place.

I am not against some kind of "public review" and I really like arxiv.org. But I do not see it as a replacement for a peer review. It may start after a peer review when the paper is published, which IMHO should almost always be in an Open Access way.

For AI, the borders seem to have blurred a bit between academic scientists (e.g. at universities) and external scientists at companies or even private people). The problem with the latter is that it is much harder to enforce good scientific practice. Think only about the time it takes to write the state of the art of an ordinary conference paper.

I am also a bit drawn between giving everyone the chance to contribute to research and ensuring good scientific practice. Just writing down your latest ideas and successes is not the same as writing a scientific paper that shows the research in the context of past research and needs, for instance, to be much more mathematically rigorous.

I am sorry for that. Fortunately, this does not resemble my experience (electrical engineering/digital signal processing).

Usually I got quite critical comments (positive and/or negative). Yes, sometimes a reviewer does not write even a single sentence before giving an average score to complete the review process. But this has not been the regular case.

And as a reviewer for a conference paper of 4 to 6 pages, I usually assigned 1 to 3 hours to read it (journal papers: 1 to 2 days) and to give comments.

Yep, I was delighted that an MMSE estimator came up so early!

Here, you may give seminars. These are often about solving some tasks (e.g., "compute the Fourier transform of a triangle"). Sometimes it is just consultation where students can ask stuff about the lecture. You may als be asked to conduct lab experiments with students. Sometimes your only teaching consists of supervising student research projects, Bachelor's theses or Master's theses.

The lectures are usually given by the professor (head of the research group). Sometimes a PhD gives a lecture when the professor is away. But yes, it depends on your employment contract. If your contract involves a lot of teaching you might even give a whole lecture - though this is rarely the case for employees without PhD.

This is a very simplistic view of a PhD and basically a prejudice.

During conducting a PhD, you learn a lot about organizing yourself, about how to work together with others in a professional context, about teaching and guiding others, about presenting you and your results orally and in a written way, about using certain tools (whatever applies in your field) and so on.

Some people like to view it the way that a PhD makes you a expert in one field and rendering yourself useless for any other task. But this is in general far from reality. As a PhD (at least where I live in Germany and in the field of engineering) you are indeed expected to have a broad view such that you are able to know where you are located with your PhD topic and such that you are indeed not a narrow expert.

The idea is really nice. And I think projects like this could help elderly or mentally less gifted people.

Unfortunately, things break inside the programs. Usually the folder structure is still exposed as-is and the programs (except things like calculators or synthesizers) do not look like things from the physical world.

I have to do with some elderly people who do not have a mental model about file systems, program menus, tabs, and other things. They learn by heart where to click. And then they forget it when they do not use it on a regular basis. But they cannot regain this knowledge on their own since the UI has no inherent logic for them.

Your country started the war murdering thousands of Ukrainians. So, what do you expect?

One goal is probably to show average Russians that the war is not just something which happens somewhere else in the world - a side-note on the news, no need to bother about.

The question why people who do not agree with the government should also pay the price for a war started by their government/country is not specific to this war.

ISAC = Integrated Sensing and Communication

I did not mean to say that an LLM knows literally all the publications. But the abstract knowledge is probably encoded in the weights.

There is a chance that someone from a completely different field came up with a solution for a tiny part of your problem.

If you can remember the content of any scientific publication and any book in the world, you are able to make use of this knowledge in every step of you proof.

However, this does now answer how the model came up with the specific route it has taken for the proof.

I suspect there are a lot of German companies that have thousands of documents that describe their software/product. Adding or changing a feature means you have to ask 20 people whether there might something that can break some edge case behavior for which no (automatic) test exists. In this case, it would be nice to have a virtual employee who knows the content of all documents.

I even experienced the opposite case: Some feature was first rejected since everyone agreed that it would break some behavior. After talking to several people again, I discovered that the use case which required this behavior did not exist anymore and had been officially phased out years before. Maybe, some RAG LLM could have told me, based on company documents, that there is some edge case that can be removed making the way free for the new feature.

There are more people than only young, intelligent people who want to use the world wide web.

As mentioned somewhere else in the comments here: This is just one aspect where US American culture is being favored and forced on other people and their culture.

Yes, I know how fire hydrants look like in the USA. But this is not the point. It is about respecting other people's abilities and cultures.

To me, "Ich bin Berliner" sounds relatively neutral, or like a short statement. "Ich bin ein Berliner" sounds a bit less direct or a bit softer to me because you state that you are just one of the citizens of Berlin. But this may be just my feeling.

(In case you put the emphasis on "ein", you would clearly emphasize that you are just one of the many Berlin citizens.)

I liked this: "I can prove I’ve solved this Sudoku without revealing it" https://youtu.be/Otvcbw6k4eo

As I said, the far-right usually do not stop there.

One problem with "we only want the illegal or 'imcompatible' ones to leave the country" is that right-winged people tend to get extremer sooner or later. Other people will make them believe into more and more crude theories (like white people being more valuable than people of color) which leads to even more extreme actions (like murder). Hence, we have to say "no" to right-wing ideas as early as possible.

I think (relative) poverty is not an explanation on its own.

This is my take: Poverty makes people not vote for some parties. But making so many vote for a party, especially with unconstitutional goals, is the result of a lot of desinformation. The AfD uses any possible opportunity and any possible topic to tell people that Germany is rotten to the core - while it is truly one of the riches country in the world with mandatory health insurance and unemployment compensation. (Not saying that Germany does not have significant problems. Far from.) Then, they tell people whom to blame (refugees, jews, homosexuals etc.). This builds up hatred. it is not important whether anything of this is true at all. All that counts is: They can continue to be angry.

There are enough YouTubers who show AfD voters contradictions in their arguments. The AfD voters usually react with even more hate. They just want to see things burn while accepting any possible collateral damage.

The complete title is "Germany’s far-right AfD win historic victory, but fall short of majority in Saxony-Anhalt".

How can I change the title?

Apart from this, "winning" an election is not the same as actually becoming the government.

I feel so angry with and ashamed of my own country in a way I cannot even find words for.

Getting linear algebra in a programming language close to math formulas was, for a long time, my reason to use Octave.

When I first read about Julia, I was really amazed - especially the type system with its multiple dispatching and not automatically converting between types (e.g., between integers and floats). Though, I do not know, how Julia is today.

Today, I use Python instead of Octave (or Julia) - just because it has a large ecosystem and is widely adopted. An additional advantage is that Python has much better OOP features than Octave had back then.

However, I wished Julia had the status that Python has today.

Which open tools or libraries are currently the best to extract/remove vocals? Are there some that can even distinguish between speech and singing?

The Misspecified Cramér-Rao Bound is a minimum bound for the estimation performance (mean-squared error) when the assumed model of the estimator is not the real model.

Yeah. Somehow the rate of such and other cool, trippy topics seems to have declined on HN in favor of more and more AI topics.

Really interesting read, thank you!

One thing I found especially interesting: They argue that you can express the (complex) exponential function exp(x) as a power series with powers x^k. They do not say it explicitly, but if we assume the power series comes from a Taylor series, then the k-th factor 1/(k!) is the derivative evaluated at x=0. And the k-th derivative has exactly the unit needed to cancel the unit of x^k. So, all summands of the series are unitless and hence the exponential function's argument is unitless.

This argument would hold for any function which can be written as a series like this. I am wondering whether this is actually a "problem" of the derivative operator.