skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In a CPU with many cores, when some cores stall by waiting for memory loads, other cores can proceed by using data from their caches and this is even more likely to happen than for the SMT threads that share the same cache memory.

When there are enough cores, they will keep the common memory interface busy all the time, so adding SMT is unlikely to increase the performance in a memory-throughput limited application when there already are enough cores.

Keeping busy all the ALUs in a compute-limited application can usually be done well enough by out-of-order execution, because the modern CPUs have very big execution windows from which to choose instructions to be executed.

So when there already are many cores, in many cases SMT may provide negligible advantages. On server computers there are much more opportunities for SMT to improve their efficiency, but on non-server computers I have encountered only one widespread application for which SMT is clearly beneficial, which is the compilation of big software projects (i.e. with thousands of source files).

The big cores of Intel are optimized for single-thread performance. This optimization criterion results in bad multi-threaded performance. The reason is that the MT performance is limited by the maximum permissible chip area and by the maximum possible power consumption. A big core has very poor performance per area and performance per power ratios.

Adding SMT to such a big core improves the multi-threaded performance, but it is not the best way of improving it, because in the same area and power consumption used by a big core one can implement 3 to 5 efficient cores, so such a replacement of a big core with multiple efficient cores will increase the multi-threaded performance much more than adding SMT. So unlike for the case of a CPU that uses only big cores, in hybrid CPUs, SMT does not make sense, because a better MT performance is obtained by keeping only a few big cores, to provide high single-thread performance, and by replacing the other big cores with smaller, more efficient cores.
Weirdly I found that most of the restaurants I ate at in Italy were level with or worse than the Italian restaurants in Melbourne, Australia. I think part of it was just that it's hard to find the good ones vs the average/bad ones in Italy while Italian restaurants in Australia tend to all be targeting higher end food.

The Autogrill ones were not terrible but not particularly good. Mostly just stale sandwiches with good quality ingredients.
When I was in the music biz I pushed back hard against DRM. I lost, but being on the inside I could swing the needle to the least restrictive DRM as possible (e.g. it let you burn a CD for instance). Most of the other devs I worked with would have simply taken the ultra-restrictive spec, coded it and gone home happy each night. (I did code some shitty ActiveX object for Sony to put on one of their unrippable CDs though... it let you download a DRM-hobbled version of the song)

I can count on one hand though the number of devs I've worked with that saw coding as anything more than a 9-5 grind and would have spoken up if asked to do something shady.
Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying
I got over the trend of naming them after cartoon characters/greek gods/etc a loooong time ago.

Device use/users name/number.

Esoteric names are just embarrasingly silly.
And this is exactly why so many of the larger companies are embracing either more ephemeral messaging modes or outright deleting history.

https://www.law.com/corpcounsel/2024/01/26/feds-warn-compani...
It can be won. Winning the war on drugs is defined. You lose 99% of all the aspects of a drug-stained society.
...you know, while I personally think that the RISC approach was an honest mistake, stuff like this makes me see why some people wanted to got rid of complex instructions.

Well, supposedly RISC-V implementations will have none of this malarkey while still rivaling x64/ARM64 in processing speed at comparable technology/clock rates/prices, just with plain old loads-and-xors-and-stores?
The point is basically

> just do your own thing, but explore paths you've never walked before.

Yeah that's how people grow, no joke. It's kind of independent to the rest of the article shilling LLMs.
Note that the hot patching may not be explicitly driven. As in there isn't someone looking at the failure of specifically goat problems and specifically seeking out to improve it. But rather that data is continually ingested and the more viral a limitation becomes, the more likely it is to be captured in the new training. Though that isn't to say that someone won't throw in a few river crossing puzzles to the RLHF part of the training. Both these will make the model better at these puzzles but not make them better at the abstract capabilities people are using these examples to show that LLMs are incapable of.

The best thing to do, and I can assure you still works, is to use variations. In fact, this is something both Colin (Fraser) and I have been doing over the last few years. The point of them isn't to prove that the models are incapable of solving the puzzles, it is to show that they are brittle. It is to show how subtleties can cause failure in environments where we know what the correct answer should be so that we are cautious in environments where the solutions are unknown (at least to us).

Here is an example of such a variation[0]:

> A farmer must cross a river with a goose, a snake, and a duck. Only one animal may fit in the boat with the farmer. If the farmer leaves the snake alone it'll slither away as the goose or duck attack it. Both the goose can fly and swim and but the duck can only swim because its wings are clipped. They will follow the farmer wherever he goes. What is the minimum number of trips the farmer must take to get all animals across the river?

I'll also mention that my first go had "Both the goose and duck can both fly and swim" with which it was able to get the right answer. Note that my modification does not realistically change the outcome, but it causes GPT to answer differently (in my case it thinks 5 trips while believing the duck can fly). It isn't that I iterated to find something that "tricked" GPT (even if my second try), it is that the ability to do this demonstrates that the machine does not actually understand what is being asked[1].

[0] Puzzle results: https://imgur.com/a/5X9L1fR

[1] Yes, humans may fall for similar tricks. But usually for a different reason, specifically they are thinking you are trying to trick them and are looking for the trick. GPT isn't expecting a trick and is treating the question at face value. But if you keep doing this with humans (implicitly done in GPT training) they'll learn there is no trick and then get 100% accuracy. Their error will then be more likely in that they'll turn off their brain and if you switch back to tricking they'll error until they reorient because they were allocating processing power elsewhere. GPT is giving you 100% all the time, humans do not.
>events (physical or digital) that are just for companies presenting their products in a certain area.

These are forms of advertising too.
People want to get into the US without having their personal thoughts searched. US citizens also have the right to enter the US without personal thoughts searched.
I tried multiple times to use or create such workflow but it never sticks. I realized the only thing I need is to write things down and link notes when possible. No structure, no tags, no processes. It works well.
The only missing thing for me is good local llm integration to ask questions agains notes.
I wasn’t arguing that this was just as bad before. It’s clearly all made worse and accelerated by social media calling engagement and ad dollars above all.

Historically the victims of contagion have been oldsters in a moral panic. This time I think it is actually true - there’s a mind virus loose.
you got lucky with the hardware. there was a bunch of wifi cards that wouldn't work in Linux because there were no drivers. and then ndiswrapper came along and let you use windows drivers in Linux. now that was a user unfriendly procedure of getting it working. some chipsets eventually got native drivers like ralink or b53 but getting things working was not easy!
Doubt it. It may have started with this, but it didn't live its life like that.

Drug free societies are way better in every measurable way. You only have to live in one for long enough that returning from that place seems absurd to be ridiculed with drugs.
To me, "hoard" comes with an implication of amassing these in secret and/or not making full use of them. If Meta is crowing about how many they have, and seemingly putting them to good use (or at least some use), I wouldn't call that hoarding.

I occasionally acquire half-decent hardware for stress testing. If I add a pair of Dell servers to the lab (or, heaven help me, anything from IBM), I don't feel like I'm hoarding. What I do feel, after spending $50-500K of someone else's money, is a responsibility to get their money's worth out of it.

I can understand, then, Tesla shareholder frustration with 12,000 of these being diverted to a different neighborhood in Muskville. Talk about other people's money.
There is basis for that assertion.

Via Google: https://www.techtarget.com/searchsecurity/news/450420491/Mic...

(Also via myself, as I was at MS when we wanted to make this change and the EU said no.)
Right, so a slightly better analogy would be if you wanted to install a remote starter, but then you find out that they can only be installed into Fords, because other auto manufacturers (Apple, Linux in this case) believe that tampering with the critical path (the engine, kernel) is unsafe. It isn't Ford who's at fault for allowing you to run some random engine modification, it's that mod that is at fault.
I look forward to you reviewing your HN contributions in a decade or so.
These could be very interesting devices if they were not infected with binary blobs.
Yes your experience is heavily location dependent.
As far as I know hypertreads on intel share fetchers and decoders, so each clock cycle only one thread is feeding in instructions to the pipeline. That's no different to even for a simple barrel processor.

It is true that once fetched an OoO CPU does a significant amount of scheduling and it is possible that in a given clock cycle instructions from both threads are getting fed to an execution unit. But I don't think that's the essence of SMT.

For example the original larrabee is described as 4-way SMT, but as P5-derived it was a simple in-order design with very limited superscalar capabilities. I very much doubt that at any time instructions from more than one thread were at the execution stage.
> Some coworkers seem to be having better success but I definitely get the sense they are reading and editing the results carefully.

Yes, you need to consider the AI as if it were a junior programmer that sometimes makes mistakes. I use it for boring work that can be quickly checked. For example, the other day I asked for a 'give me next workday' algorithm based on the code structure I had, and it worked fine.

It's just one more tool in the toolbox.
The tail handling is the main point of the post. The tolower1 line on the chart is very spiky because the autovectorizer doesn’t use masked loads and stores for tails, and instead does something slower that tanks performance. The tolower64 line is smoother and rises faster because masked loads and stores make it easier to handle strings shorter than the vector size.
Have they made any money running these?
The money would have to come from somewhere - premiums for customers? Those would be higher?

And what lower counterparty risk? Now each investor is personally on the hook. Instead of walking away without their investment, now they are responsible for any loss. That’s higher risk.
And that has absolutely nothing to do with them coming up with better approaches then discussing them with industry for potential roll out, adoption, etc.

But instead, now they're in trouble they're trying to blame the EU for stopping their monopoly.

Do you honestly believe MS being unhindered by competition restraints would lead to better results?

Are you forgetting MS has already demonstrated how that goes, and been literally convicted for it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._Commission

(there are plenty of other examples)
"Bought" is just a fancy word for "granted a license for usage, subject to terms and conditions, which may be revoked at any time, for any reason, without any warning"
It has nothing to do with business model. Get out the tome that is the Visa network rules and try to figure it out. It's not some simple thing.
What will charging the parents achieve?
For personal devices, carried on me, they're used in many contexts, and so I choose simple names with some self-description. I'm currently using k2mbp, I pun this into a mountain theme on this host. My previous laptops have included, kmbp, mmbp, nmbp. I've liked this over descriptive or evocative names.
Your scenario describes real people, but Facebook was not built by vulnerable visa holders.

Facebook hired and retained engineers over its entire company history by offering enormous amounts of stock. They successfully demonstrated there are a lot of engineers willing to build unethical products when offered 2-3x their previous salary.
RISC-V does have RVV, which similarly can do SIMD, has masking, but also has a vector length separate from masks: https://godbolt.org/z/rrEW85snh. Complete with its own set of ~40000 C intrinsics (https://dzaima.github.io/intrinsics-viewer).

Though, granted, RVV is significantly more uniform than AVX-512 (albeit at the cost of not having some useful goodies).
The game is working out well for them. Why would they want to change it? What's next? Lebron should push for rule changes that make it easier for short guys?
That's true, but anyone can get a license.
this isnt even the first time its happened. Crowdstrike has killed an OS every month for the past four months.

At this point they are a threat actor. if you havent kicked their amateur-hour software out of your infrastructure by now, chances are good senior management and engineering have at least considered it formally.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrowdStrike#Severe_outage_inci...
Out of all the comments, this one speaks to me the most. No idea why either :) but I think I have my new system. Thank you for posting this!
yes, they did

ruby and js got shift and unshift from perl, which got shift from sh, where it's the only way to iterate over an array or other list. (also, sh only has one array)

in the old country, instead of shift and unshift, we said cdr and cons. we didn't have push and pop; if we wanted to mess with the backside of a list we had to reverse it first. but our code ran ten times as fast as ruby and had implicit undo

at some point don hopkins suggested, i think it was, eat and barf for, respectively, push and pop on the front end. the back end would then necessarily be boof and shit (not shift). betcha wouldn't forget which end those pertained to
Here's an actual compliant at MS to the EU from an anti-malware vendor: https://www.techtarget.com/searchsecurity/news/450420491/Mic...

This is and has been a thing for quite some time. Windows is a highly regulated OS.
Here is one approach that works: block/reduce the majority of sound physically. And then use s microphone with an adaptive filterbank to let in only the sounds you want to have. This is how hearing protection with speech passthrough works.

Masking with a static noise source can also help.
Not related but funny:

Men's Brains and Women's Brains with Mark Gungor (Nothing Box)
https://youtu.be/SZ6mVumHY9I?si=vWEyWbKcai0tW3CH
Why Navajo is one of the most difficult languages (2023)
I don't think AI could generate 90% or even 40% of my code, but by god does it generate me a lot of boilerplate and comments. My work just gave us all Copilot and it's really good at creating useful comments (even for Pydocs), and writing out simple but mildly tedious things like the outline of a loop, simple functions etc. No risk really from either since they're all short enough for me to sanity check as the AI is writing them, but a very very useful little time saver IMO.
Florida has no minimum age of court jurisdiction. Neither does the federal government:

> The minimum age of court jurisdiction refers to the youngest age a child can be held responsible criminally for an offense.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2023/02/07/florida-shows-h...
RO2040 isn’t slow - it’s literally one of the fastest on the market. It’s a dual core microcontroller that can easily run both cores at 133-250+ MHz.

https://github.com/Wren6991/PicoDVI

The GPIO on RPi is not very useful for precision work and you’re limited to using SPI (usually to talk to an auxiliary microcontroller). The GPIO on RP2040 is so good that you can use it as 24 channel 100Msps logic analyzer in a pinch.

https://github.com/gusmanb/logicanalyzer
I think the acknowledgements in your second link are interesting:

> I thank Stephen Wolfram for an enjoyable conversation about this review;
We went through the trouble years ago of ensuring all our important user data was not being stored on user machines. We then warned users whenever we noticed files being stored improperly that we would spend _zero_ effort recovering those files if their machine is lost, stolen or otherwise attacked by malware.

This made "nuke it from orbit" the default repair strategy for complicated machine issues.

I can't imagine having to putz around with BitLocker keys with zero infrastructure designed to actually use them in a disaster scenario let alone just a major inconvenience like this. I'm glad we never put ourselves in a position to have to do that.
RISC-V has SIMD extension as well. Even when there is no SIMD, prefetching or instruction selection/scheduling will have a big impact on the performance, so it is unlikely one can easily write a few lines of assembly and get to a similar level of performance.
> Communication with management is bidirectional, sometimes they need a lot of persuasion.

Sounds like managing up, i.e. doing IC workload and the manager's job. Hard pass.
In an enterprise environment, I'd like a networking solution that allows me to run an app on my own office workstation and expose it as a service to some part of the company at an SLO that can be reasonably be guaranteed with a workstation: 99.9%. That would allow to cut so much time in "productionizing" stuff that doesn't need CI/CD pipelines or deploy to a datacenter: just me editing a Python file and restarting it.
Thats unsurprising. "Italian" food in America isn't and the Autogrill is excellent.
The (Clojure) "JVM Slow Startup Time" Myth
ACH costs zero and some retailers accept it and more and more now with FedNow.

International remittance - atlantic money does $3 or something flat. By the time you get your cash into a crypto exchange and out, you are hosed for more than $3. If you can be bothered to open an account with someone like Interactive Brokers (yes, a traditional online stock brokerage) you can do it for about zero - you get wholesale FX prices and you can deposit/withdraw money from various accounts as long as you have all the paper work in place - annoying, but doable.

Again, a couple entries into relational databases, which is the true underlying cost structure of "traditional finance" is really hard to beat.
Italy has become a den of tourist traps. I ate terribly there despite my Italian is still good enough that the locals thought I was a native Roman (I lived there as a teen)
The fetchers and decoders are shared, but they fetch and decode many instructions per clock cycle (up to 8 or 9 instructions per clock cycle in the latest Intel cores, i.e. Lion Cove and Skymont).

While the shared Intel decoders alternate between the threads and the queue that stores micro-operations before they are dispatched is also partitioned between threads, this front-end is decoupled from the schedulers that select micro-operations for execution, which may choose in any clock cycle as many uops as there are execution units and in any combination between the SMT threads.

Even in the first Intel CPU with SMT, Pentium 4, up to 3 instructions were fetched and decoded in each clock cycle and there were places where up to 7 instructions in any combination between the 2 SMT threads were executed during the same clock cycle.

In modern CPUs the concurrency is much greater.
Thanks for that analysis, very informative!

I have not tried to get the best possible performance: at first I wanted to see if it would work at all, and the fact that my first attempt performed really well was a bonus! My main point of interest is strings less than the size of a vector register, and getting rid of the troughs in the throughput chart.

You can click through the link to the code at the end of the blog post, which has all the licence details. It is 0BSD or MIT-0 except for the parts written originally for BIND which are MPL-2.0.
Yep that's a totally fair point. I was actually just talking to my father-in-law about that earlier today. We were processing a couple roosters and he was mentioning stories from his mother about how bad meat processing plants used to be.

If I wasn't generally opposed to an ever-growing scope of federal powers, I'd probably support an effective ban or extremely high bar on new additives. If food companies aren't willing to test it they shouldn't bother trying to sell it.
>I've often wondered why people don't expect free labour from other trades.

lol, what? Spend any amount of time with a tradesperson (or go on a trade-specific subreddit) and you’ll hear plenty of stories about people asking for free labor or a quick favor.

For what it’s worth, “I’m sorry, I don’t know how to fix that. I’d try (basic troubleshooting step) and then talk to (person who actually knows how to fix it) if that doesn’t work” usually works fine for me. Most people aren’t trying to milk you for endless free work.
>One of the challenges working as a software developer is that friends and family tend to view 'tech' as an amorphous blob.

Forget friends and family, most Project/Product Managers think the same way, and they are often way harder to say no to.
Ive done a lot of work with barcodes, barcode scanners, and symbologies. Many of the cheap ones absolutely will. They just don’t utilize the tracking laser to get a reflection as the light from the screen is literally being shone into the sensor. The bars don’t have to be perfectly black, just dark enough from the “quiet” areas to have recognizable contrast.
I ask friends with special skills to help me from time to time. In return I help them with things I know how to do. If they ask for too much I simply explain that what they want will be too time consuming, is out of my area of expertise, or that I don’t have enough free time at the moment.

It’s usually not difficult to tell someone no.
If they are ordered by severity, with the most severe coming just before lunch, the implication is the harsher sentencing is due to the ordering rather than the hunger pangs of the judge. Ie the hunger thesis is a spurious correlation.