skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
LLMs get to maybe ~20% of the rated max FLOPS for a GPU. It’s not hard to imagine that a purpose built ASIC with maybe adjusted software stack gets us significantly more real performance.
The Rolls-Royce SMR designs are considerably larger in MW than the subs so I doubt there is anything shared or any efficiencys to come from that sadly.
maybe a clearer case - the “planetary” model of electrons floating around the nucleus is useful in chemistry and is still taught in grade school, but i would definitely call it “discarded” in that no one doing research in the field would use that - it’s just a useful model for “engineering” practitioners
This cool but comfyui has been doing this for years.
We know exactly why, it is because floating point operations aren't associative but the GPU scheduler assumes they are, and the scheduler isn't deterministic. Running the model strictly hurts performance so they don't do that.
> Waymo also operates exclusively in urban areas

There is no proximate future where public transit makes sense in Wyoming. There are multiple where self-driving cars do.
Don't worry, it's not like those algorithms are uncontrollably prone to inventing false citations and completely mischaracterizing real ones.

Besides, the stakes are low, nobody's talking about changes that will affect millions of people or anything.
Maybe it's not linear spend.
> Laying down x length of rail track is not a difficult problem whatsoever

First by track and third by tonnage (after China and Russia).
I'm the same age as you; I feel lost, erring in being a little too pessimistic.

Feels like I hit the real world just a couple years too late to get situated in a solid position. Years of obsession in attempt to catch up to the wizards, chasing the tech dream. But this, feels like this is it. Just watching the timebomb tick. I'd love to work on what feels like the final technology, but I'm not a freakshow like what these labs are hiring. At least I get to spectate the creation of humanity's greatest invention.

This announcement is just another gut punch, but at this point I should expect its inevitable. A Jason Voorhees AGI, slowly but surely to devour all the talents and skills information workers have to offer.

Apologies for the rambly and depressing post, but this is reality for anyone recently out or still in school.
Note that this is done for “existing formally verified C codebases” which is a lot different from typical systems C code which is not formally verified.
When I go to https://model.energy/ and run the optimization algorithm on Bayern using 2030 cost assumptions, it finds that using solar/wind/batteries/hydrogen to produce steady power output costs 77.8 euro/MWh. This is probably cheaper than new construction nuclear would be there.

Europe in general is one of the worst parts of the world for renewable energy, but this just means that in a post-fossil fuel, renewable powered world, Europe will be at a competitive disadvantage in energy intensive industries, and nuclear will not save them vs. industries in sunnier places.
We've seen compatibility layers between x86 and arm. Am I correct in thinking that a compatibility layer between riscV and arm would be easier/more performant since they're both risc architectures?
Did you notice how there's a difference of 70,000 people between the low and high estimates for Hiroshima, despite the fact that there's been ample opportunity to study the site and records during peacetime?

You're comparing a) the number of named, positively identified deceased people counted during an active conflict [1] where Gaza's healthcare system has been targeted on a daily basis with b) the final body count [2] from something that took place 79 years ago and has been studied by historians for decades. They're not comparable. In actual fact, fatality counts of Palestinians have been subjected to a standard far more stringent than anything applied during other ongoing conflicts, at least in "western" media.

It will probably be a decade before anyone is able to dig up the mass graves, sort through the rubble, interview families (that haven't been entirely wiped out), and come to a more complete list, and even then there will be a large number of unidentified deaths and the estimate will be a range.

[1] Really the word "conflict" is inappropriate here, because most of what's taking place is attacks on Palestinian civilian. The actual military conflict appears to be only a small percentage of the overall violence.

[2] Incidentally, both the high and low estimates for Hiroshima deaths also include people who died from the after-effects of the bombing, not just people who died during the attack itself.
Now that's a headline that you don't want to type wrong.
> Being vulnerable to strategic voting is a huge downside that outweighs other considerations.

I disagree that strategic voting as a downside outweighs the downsides of RCV or FPTP - especially when FPTP itself is susceptible to strategic voting, too. None of the three satisfy the condorcet winner criterion (that is: none of them guarantee the winner would beat every other candidate head-to-head), but it seems less likely / more contrived for score/approval voting to fail it.

> And in approval voting you need to think about how others will vote and pick your cutoff point based on who you think has a chance - do you vote "yes" for the center-right party to avoid the hard right party getting in? Or do you vote "no" to help the center-left party beat the center-right party? (swap those directions to personal preference)

That's why I'd personally go with a simple three-level score vote: "yeah", "meh", or "nah". If people really want to shoot themselves in the foot by ignoring the "meh" option, then so be it, but at least the option is there for people to vote "meh" for candidates that are merely acceptable/tolerable (and reserve "yeah" for ideal candidates and "nah" for unacceptable/intolerable candidates).
too late :)
What exactly is wrong with how they expressed themselves?

Is the word "hate" really so odious?
With only a 100x increase in cost, we improved performance by 0.1x and continued plotting this concave-down diminishing-returns type graph! Hurray for logarithmic x-axes!

Joking aside, better than ever before at any cost is an achievement, it just doesn't exactly scream "breakthrough" to me.
> And I'm not aware of any KSP mod that helps you plan slingshots

If you're willing to go for the full n-body package, Principia [0] has a pretty nice flight planner that is quite usable for planning more complicated missions.

KSP Trajectory Optimization Tool [1] is a non-mod alternative with some additional capabilities beyond flight planning as well. I think this one is designed for stock gravity so it should be usable in an otherwise vanilla install.

[0]: https://github.com/mockingbirdnest/Principia

[1]: https://github.com/Arrowstar/ksptot
That exists - it’s called Google Workspace.
The benchmark is designed to test for AGI and intelligence, specifically the ability to solve novel problems.

If the hypothesis is that LLMs are the “computer” that drives the AGI then of course the benchmark is relevant in testing for AGI.

I don’t think you understand the benchmark and its motivation. ARC AGI benchmark problems are extremely easy and simple for humans. But LLMs fail spectacularly at them. Why they fail is irrelevant, the fact they fail though means that we don’t have AGI.
I use NixOS for the base system and Flatpak+Containers for everything else. I would rather keep it this way as it keeps everything nice and separated, and less chance of things breaking from Nix being rolling.
>I'm 22 and have no clue what I'm meant to do in a world where this is a thing.

For what it's worth that's probably an advantage versus the legions of people who are staring down the barrel of years invested into skills that may lose relevance very rapidly.
OHRRPGCE
Rumble Gets $775M Investment from Crypto Firm Tether
IBM's new family of AI models for materials discovery
Cool. Now they just have to last 10k years. I'll add that the last person I know to be in Colorado State University's library observed almost no books, Just computer stations.
Did they just skip o2?
Chinese population is falling now, I believe. There's some talk the ~1.4 B official figure is seriously overstated as well.
It's tricky to judge the difficulty of these sorts of things. Eg, breadth of possibilities isn't an automatic sign of difficulty. I imagine the space of programming problems permits as much variety as ARC-AGI, but since we're more familiar with problems presented as natural language descriptions of programming tasks, and since we know there's tons of relevant text on the web, we see the abstract pictographic ARC-AGI tasks as more novel, challenging, etc. But, to an LLM, any task we can conceive of will be (roughly) as familiar as the amount of relevant training data it's seen. It's legitimately hard to internalize this.

For a space of tasks which are well-suited to programmatic generation, as ARC-AGI is by design, if we can do a decent job of reverse engineering the underlying problem generating grammar, then we can make an LLM as familiar with the task as we're willing to spend on compute.

To be clear, I'm not saying solving these sorts of tasks is unimpressive. I'm saying that I find it unsuprising (in light of past results) and not that strong of a signal about further progress towards the singularity, or FOOM, or whatever. For any of these closed-ish domain tasks, I feel a bit like they're solving Go for the umpteenth time. We now know that if you collect enough relevant training data and train a big enough model with enough GPUs, the training loss will go down and you'll probably get solid performance on the test set. Trillions of reasonably diverse training tokens buys you a lot of generalization. Ie, supervised learning works. This is the horse Ilya Sutskever's ridden to many glorious victories and the big driver of OpenAI's success -- a firm belief that other folks were leaving A LOT of performance on the table due to a lack of belief in the power of their own inventions.
I'm always wary of definitions for things that require complex explanations, and are subject to debate. That doesn't mean it's invalid, but it just speaks to - and I hate to say this - a possible influence of academic studies or literature or class content.

I once asked a person who described themselves as 'ethically non-monogamous' what that meant, if it were possible to love more than one person. I was told I was presumptuous, I needed to do more reading, and she gave me multiple paragraphs that interspersed terms like 'the traditional family model' that suggested this was coming from literature.

So - unpopular opinion, and an alternative to "the world is reverting back to the original state of our ancestors with polyamory and hypergamy" -- what if a lot of these definitions are lifestyles that are catching on, due to certain personality proclivities that have always existed, and by making complex explanations we've given them acknowledgment?

In other words, niche lifestyles that have been very much studied and many academic essays written.
And to think, that my own bash scripts spend 300 lines just parsing various command-line options, while instead I could be showing this game... :-P
Neutral party here, well not so neutral, I up voted you, it's a reasonable question at first blush: however here, you're doubling down with another comment that very clearly indicates you didn't read the link provided

I highly recommend it, most incisive RISC-V article I've read.
People interested in Boston City Hall should also visit the campus of Simon Fraser University, should they ever find themselves in the metro Vancouver area.
When you switch to heat pumps you'll get AC for no extra capital cost.
But someone has to tell that link and I am sure peer pressure can be one of the major reason for addiction.
Long on IBM. AI plus quantum
BioAge: Too Young to Die?
Everything will eat anything if its hungry enough but to say there is no better food is a broad statement I'm not comfortable agreeing with.
I was there and the wiki article captures the look, but not the feel. Giant funky mouse pointers that flip which direction they point as you hover over elements, but without apparent logic...Window maximizing behavior that left you unable to get back to the desktop...Minimized windows disappearing, never to be seen again...
Horses snacking chicks. Videos easy to be found.
Easy to say difficult to do. Most people have family, work, 100's of tensions etc.. Reducing calories might not be that much of priority.
Beautiful. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this looks like a bash version of https://lodev.org/cgtutor/raycasting.html

Edit: ah, just noticed this is in the readme :(
I had the ARC AGI in mind when I suggested human workers. I agree the other benchmark results make the use of human workers unlikely.
Funnily enough, embyronic processes, which goes along with the zygote naming scheme. Similar idea of a small process specifically for forking, but this is a more comprehensive model.

Described in these nicely written comments by others:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32794270
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30510318
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29697645
what prevents students who participate in math/programming contest to also be indie game developers?
How does NTP work? GPS is stratum 0. Starlink could be effectively stratum 1.
I remember someone making a card game GALGA [1] in Haskell and compiling a high-level "rules" DSL to a low-level "animation" DSL and "primitive" DSL for handling animations and state changes respectively.

[1] https://roganmurley.com/2021/12/11/free-monads.html
> If most don't have any money to buy products, just invent some other money and start paying one of the other people who doesn't have any money to start making the products for you.

This isn't possible if you want to pay sales taxes - those are what keep transactions being done in the official currency. Of course in a world of 99% unemployment presumably we don't care about this.

But yes, this world of 99% unemployment isn't possible, eg because as soon as you have two people and they trade things, they're employed again.
> o3 presumably isn't doing program synthesis

I'd guess it's doing natural language procedural synthesis, the same way a human might (i.e. figuring the sequence of steps to effect the transformation), but it may well be doing (sub-)solution verification by using the procedural description to generate code whose output can then be compared to the provided examples.

While OpenAI haven't said exactly what the architecture of o1/o3 are, the gist of it is pretty clear - basically adding "tree" search and iteration on top of the underlying LLM, driven by some RL-based post-training that imparts generic problem solving biases to the model. Maybe there is a separate model orchestrating the search and solution evaluation.

I think there are many tasks that are easy enough for humans but hard/impossible for these models - the ultimate one in terms of commercial value would be to take an "off the shelf model" and treat it as an intern/apprentice and teach it to become competent in a entire job it was never trained on. Have it participate in team meetings and communications, and become a drop-in replacement for a human performing that job (any job that an be performed remotely without a physical presence).
Yes. For branding reasons since o2 is a telco brand in the UK
> Self driving vehicles, with current technology, are unrealistic outside major cities

Why? My Subaru can practically drive itself on most Wyoming roads, including in whiteout conditions. It’s easier to drive with fewer cars around. It’s just not as profitable to field a fleet in suburban and rural America.
yeah i really liked that tutorial
$2B luxury 'eco-district' has increased Monaco's size by 3%
Opiate of the masses (21st Century version)
Isn’t this good? We’ve literally told teenagers to not use drugs or have sex for decades and it’s obviously working. The consequences are far higher today or at least more well understood and the messaging is getting through.

We’ve trained younger generations to be extremely risk adverse and they’ve listened. I line they’re probably dangerously exposed to other risks that we don’t have generational knowledge of yet.
"Raw resources" aren't that valuable economically because they aren't where most of the value is added in production. That's why having a lot of them tends to make your country poorer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse).
same experience recently. we interviewed both but cut the interview after 10-15 minutes. both candidates had american names but appeared to be of asian descent with heavy accents
TiddlyWiki famously does this! It's a great system for what it needs to be. https://tiddlywiki.com/
Notre Dame Stadium: a more practical building than Notre-Dame de Paris.
> As far as I am aware, there is nothing about the RISC-V architecture which inherently prevents it from ever being competitive with ARM

Lack of reg+shifted reg addressing mode and or things like BFI/UBFX/TBZ

The perpetual promise of magic fusion inside the cores has not played out. No core exists to my knowledge that fuses more than two instructions at a time. Most of those take more than two to make. Thus no core exists that could fuse them.
If that works that way at all depends on the group dynamic. It is easily possible that a not so bright individual takes an (unofficial) leadership position in the group and overrides the input of smarter members. Think of any meetings with various hierarchy levels in a company.
The unemployment rate in a modern economy is basically whatever the central bank wants it to be. The Great Depression was caused by bad monetary policy - I don't see a reason why having AI would cause that.
Alpine Linux does not make the news (2023)
The UK should fire their government and hire one that can deliver cheap energy via policy that creates the potential for a cheap energy market. This isn’t hard.
Developer. Prompt Engineer. Philosopher-Builder. (mostly) not programmer.

The code part will get smaller and smaller for most folks. Some frameworks or bare-metal people or intense heavy-lifters will still do manual code or pair-programming where half the pair is an agentic AI with super-human knowledge of your org's code base.

But this will be a layer of abstraction for most people who build software. And as someone who hates rote learning, I'm here for it. IMO.

Unfortunately (?) I think the 10-20-50? years of development experience you might bring to bear on the problems can be superseded by an LLM finetuned on stackoverflow, github etc once judgement and haystack are truly nailed. Because it can have all that knowledge you have accumulated, and soaked into a semi-conscious instinct that you use so well you aren't even aware of it except that it works. It can have that a million times over. Actually. Which is both amazing and terrifying. Currently this isn't obvious because it's accuracy /judgement to learn all those life-of-a-dev lessons is almost non-existent. Currently. But it will happen. That is copilot's future. It's raison d'être.

I would argue what it will never have however, simply by function of the size of training runs is unique functional drive and vision. If you wanted a "Steve Jobs" AI you would have to build it. And if you gave it instructions to make a prompt/framework to build a "Jobs" it would just be an imitation, rather than a new unique in-context version. That is the value a person has- their particular filter, their passion and personal framework. Someone who doesn't have any of those things, they had better be hoping for UBI and charity. Or go live a simple life, outside the rat race.

bows
Yes, general idea is still very important and useful, but this is post about specific command called "APPEND" in MS-DOS environment. Also, it's not an equivalent of "ln -sr" as "ln" replaces targets and not stacks them. The proper modern equivalents are environment variables like LD_LIBRARY_PATH, PYTHONPATH, PKG_CONFIG_PATH, etc... and overlayfs mounts for a generic case.

But back to the APPEND: in all my time working with MS-DOS, I don't remember ever needing that, so it was 100% irrelevant to me. But this could be because I've worked with more "modern" programs (like Turb Pascal 5) which had good support for directories.
Right and I asked you a question and it wasn’t answered. If it’s dynamically typed how come I don’t get type checking at runtime for functions I defined?
Discussion at the time (138 points, 85 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36867992
See also: anyone who lived through the decline and fall of the USSR.
Well just 8 months ago, that cost was near infinity. So it came down to 350k then that’s a massive drop
The thing about building an uncharitable narrative is that one can spin anything to be a nefarious deed. Literally anything, and we're seeing that here. A common aspect to this is distilling something as large as a company of many thousands of people with different views, projects and outputs into a singularly thinking entity that has evil intentions (along with an unhealthy dose of double-standards.)

It takes someone with a good deal of integrity to display a nuanced view of something, weighing both the good and bad.

Such observations aren't typically wanted in forums. Forums favour a "hive mind" mentality, because that's easy and doesn't require thought. Simply put <x> into the good or bad box. If we play the same game of distilling HN into a singular entity, then we already know what it thinks about Apple.

As for Apple's actions I don't think it deserves the polarised views that we see on HN. I've been around long enough to see how companies come in and out of favour and often the meddling efforts by competitors to sway such public opinion. Some people are just really distracted by team fandom and cheerleading, instead of looking at the more important question "what does <x> do for or against me personally?"
> you typically need to be unsupervised with friends to get into drugs, something teenagers no longer have access to compared to 10-15 years ago.

They don't? I'm pretty sure I saw unsupervised teens hanging out at a mall even just a few days ago.
That would only be true if you have the stomach biome to digest and extract the nutrients.

What is the point of eating something that is hard to process and digest and has no nutritional value for you

For herbivores, meat is objectively bad food .
Does Microsoft really still sell Windows as a perpetual license to enterprises? I would have thought for sure that they would have found some way to sell it as a part of a bundle/subscription by now
It may eventually be able to solve any problem
Millennials had high hopes and were disappointed; Gen Z didn't have high hopes.
"Better" is kind of a vague term. A more precise and limited statement is that meat has the highest protein quality index. There could be some other disadvantages, depending on your species.
For lack of knowing a better play at the time I got long MSFT on news of their OpenAI investment. Pretty minimal exposure but more than what I could justify elsewhere.
A Trip
Probably pretty bad.
I'm published in formal methods and see plenty of papers on static analysis of C. They ALL fail against a well designed type system.
That doesn't make any sense. Training on the train set does not make the models capabilities narrow. Models are narrow when you can't train them to do anything else even if you wanted to.

You are not narrow for undergoing training and it's honestly kind of ridiculous to think so. Not even the ARC maintainers believe so.
Funnily enough, Microsoft actually planned to add floppy drive auto-mount on Windows 95. But half the drives implemented the signal for "media present" backwards from the other half, and Microsoft couldn't figure out a user-friendly way to make it auto-detect, so they canned it
The device is illegal because the government deems satellite communication to be illegal. Like Starlink is illegal in India.
Source? Which software products are built without engineers?