skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
CUDA will still be a moat for the near future and nobody is saying that Nvidia will die, but the thing is that Nvidia margins will drop like crazy and so will it's valuation. It will go back down to being a "medium tech" company.

Basically training got way cheaper, and for inference you don't really need nvidia, so even if there's an increase for cheaper chips there's no way the volume makes up for the loss of margin.
This is the only comment you made so far that made sense, with clear assertions and references. Everything else was unfounded or inflammatory without any concrete assertion, which is why it vibed like "Fox News talking points."

While I do think what you describe under the label of "liberal universalism" mostly makes sense, I do challenge it's consistency. By all measures, some countries are trending towards becoming liberal democracies. Why shouldn't we help them?

Ukraine being a viable liberal democracy, a useful geopolitical ally, and in opposition to a destabilizing and dehumanizing autocracy, makes for a perfect candidate for support beyond naive global liberalism. It is in our interests in many practical terms, separate from ideology.
Not because they want it to be accurate but because they hate Mexico.
It's 6 billion because you have 2 copies of each chromosome. So 12 billion bits right? But I do think your original point stands. I'm mostly being pedantic.
> first thing that comes to mind is lions and gorillas

Better ones are chickens and horses. (Females, I believe, in both cases.)

Gorillas have a variety of social structures, only one which involves the Silverback fighting for dominance [1]. With lions, meanwhile, the females eat first [2].

> are they not alphas? Don't we structure our teams according to leaders?

Leaders, yes. Hotheads, no. The “alpha” hypothesis states that the most aggressive rises to the top.

[1] https://gorillas-world.com/gorilla-social-structure/

[2] https://www.felineworlds.com/lion-social-structure/
First, I absolutely love your username, 10/10! On top of others' impact on you when they give you some kudos or encouragement I'd like to add that [authentically and honestly] offering those kudos and encouragement to someone else also feels pretty incredible, compounding the effect.

And it really is important to reiterate the unintended, outsized impact your positive comments can have on the recipient. I've personally had 3-4 different people who I've known or worked with throughout my life come up to me years later and tell me how some [to me] small, offhand positive comment or compliment I'd given them had completely changed the course of their thinking on something or had kept echoing in their mind ever since.

I had had no idea until they told me.

So I guess it's also equally important, if somebody else has positively impacted you like that, to let them know what they did! It will likely completely surprise and encourage them.
Comments above broadened the scope and hostility to any government agencies is rampant in some quarters.
Personally, in the six months prior to the release of the deepseekv3 api, I'd made probably 100-200 api calls per month to llm services. In the past week I made 2.8 million api calls to dsv3.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002%E2%80%932004_SARS_outbrea...

China attempted information control on SARS-1, but rolled most of it back by April. They still haven't done this for SARS-2. That's not proof, but is a difference. Enough small differences can add up to a large difference.
And they're still burning billions with no end in sight.
nah I've seen hotheads as leaders. It's not straightforward.

See here on what an alpha is: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42848939

Also for chickens, I've raised chickens. Trust me the rooster is the leader and that thing is a male.
I think we tend to agree, but you're more frustrated by the tools and I am more frustrated by the rants from people who clearly haven't put the effort (apparently not you).

Because it's easy to criticise CMake/Automake: we love to hate them. But in my experience, even though there are tons of valid points to make, many people who say "it's just because CMake sucks" are actually just making a mess and blaming CMake.

> Have one and only one way to do thing X

Agreed. To add some nuance though, most projects are perfectly fine by just using a minimal set of features in CMake: just use `find_package` and install the dependency on the system, or locally and learn how to find it with CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH and pkgconfig. I would even say that writing a custom CMake command is almost always a bad idea.

But to me it doesn't mean that you need to have one tool that does everything (and that also makes coffee). To me it's a bad idea to configure an entire CMake project to be run by gradle for Android. Mixing build systems makes matter worse, not better.

> Make your most-commonly-used scenarios the easiest to do and the most trivial to remember;

Sure, but the risk there is that many people hide the lower level because they try to "keep it simple stupid". Which IMO is wrong. Expose the lower level, but clearly do it in... a lower-level abstraction. So that advanced users can use the low-level, and others can use the higher-level. And usually it means: start with the low-level API. If it's good, maybe someone else will write an abstraction on top of it!

I am often frustrated because projects put a lot of effort into hiding lower-level APIs and then I'm stuck (and need to e.g. fork).

> That's why I also abandoned `make`

Note that I don't write projects with make. But it has merit, and I learned to understand/maintain projects based on it. I don't learn all the build systems under the sun, but make, CMake and meson (in the C++ ecosystem) seem valuable to at least understand.

The risk with introducing yet another tool like "just" is that you make "your" problem worse: it introduces a new tool. I am usually fine learning new tools, but in my projects I try not to introduce them: I use CMake or Meson because it makes sense to expect that C++ devs should understand them.
Would that people would make the same effort to push back against PR departments, which in the case of social media companies often end up enabling the industrialized production and distribution of hyperbole.
Yeah, the cost figures need more scrutiny; they started with Llama3 which they got for free; had they had to build it from scratch it would have cost more than $6M.

But as for your first paragraph: even if the "big AI players" have some secret sauce that will make their products better (and that they can actually keep secret), it seems unlikely it would be enough to command higher prices durably.

A model would have to be incredibly superior to justify paying for it, when there are so many free (or dirt cheap) alternatives that are simply good enough.
> I think you're being less than honest with yourself

Are you sure that's me?

> A group organizing 60 protests is organizing at scale

Again: what scale? Are we talking all protests? Some? Half? What is "a lot"?

> > delegitimizes real protest movements

> Who cares?

You would, when the protest is about something that matters to you. The very thing that divides so-called Western democracy from the evil Russians is the right to organize, criticize, and protest against the government. When you can't do these things, you're living in an autocracy, something like, um... Russia?

I'll leave you to argue this one out with yourself.
It makes sense

I assume Facebook doesn't want anything posted on FB that can't be turned into a racist diatribe. There's not a whole lot of racism potential in Kernel tuning.

Maybe you could squeeze in anti-Finnish rant about Linus, but it would be minimal
It's not as good as the other stable diffusion based models, like Flux or SDXL, from only the first two attempts to be fair, but the quality was substantially lower.

I'm still planning on trying to run this locally and test some more.
"Anthropic currently uses systems containing chips from Nvidia as well as those with AWS’ Trainium and Inferentia chips to train its models." https://www.cio.com/article/3602879/anthropic-caught-up-in-a...
> wonder how they successfully justified this to the higher ups

Commoditise your complements.

Injecting competition into the watch market reduces the chances one of the majors, e.g. Apple or Altman, runs away with the wearables sector if it takes off again in respect of AI.
Anthropic on Amazon trainium chips
Docker container? It’s heavier but requires no local env considerations.
Jensen: 1000$

Customers: 10$

Jensen: 500$ :(

Customers: 20$

Jensen: 250$

Customer: 10$ + your jacket

Jensen: :'((
True, but it makes it much more difficult to get started in the first place.
DeepSeek has some something pretty remarkable. It’s certainly not “just” fine-tuning a Llama or a GPT prompt. More of a order of magnitude optimization
If there's one thing I doubt the world will have a glut of anytime soon, it's intelligence.
> My wife and I have a deal where 1 day a month, She takes the kiddo and I am absolved of all responsibilities. I get a full day to lock in and build projects.

I love it!
When I was a kid rabbit shooters would often hawk their kill from door to door. Usually they were skinned and degutted but with kidneys and liver remaining. It was said that if a rabbit had myxomatosis (aka myxo) these organs would appear spotty (even if they were myxo does not infect humans).

My mother was always wary of rabbits sold this way and usually preferred to buy them in shops. Also, back then it was about the cheapest meat one could buy.

I love rabbit, in stews, baked and so on but I haven't eaten it in years as it's so hard to get in shops where I am.

I cannot understand why Australians no longer eat rabbit given the ongoing problem we have with them—there's definitely no shortage. Rabbit meat is very lean and thus healthy. It also tastes great.
The main issue isn’t software or the phone in this case. It’s the task itself. Photogrammetry is one of the worst options to scan a car. Let me answer why:

Photogrammetry relies on unique points on an object. Imagine that the software doesn’t have any information besides what’s visible on the photos. Basically it tries to match the same points on different photos and is then able to reconstruct the object by estimation.

This works great for objects which got a unique texture or many unique points. Like a newspaper, which has a lot of non-repeating text and thus a non-repeating texture. This doesn’t word great for single color objects, as the software can’t distinguish different points on the object.

This does also work on matte,opaque objects, as reflections will show the surroundings and may alter the color.

Now combine the above: cars are usually single color, shiny and have very little corners and edges. This is photogrammetries worst nightmare. Even if you coat the whole car in a single even layer of something, then it’s still single color…

What works (but it’s a painful task!) is to sprinkle colored matte dots onto the car, preferably in a random pattern. Then you take houndreds of photos of the car. It’ll take a long time and it must be done in an even lit place. So no direct sunlight but a cloudy day or inside a building with a lot of indirect lighting.

In short:
Don’t try it and buy a scanner like Einstar instead. Renting a more expensive scanner is also an option. You’ll still need to coat the car, but it’s faster and less painful.
Another interesting method is Fibonacci Lattice.
https://observablehq.com/@meetamit/fibonacci-lattices
Why do we not value QBASIC in billions? Honestly, we value current Van Gogh paintings in billions. The past cost us more, we got here because of that art fought through decades of litigation. Does progress mean we forget all of that and hope on a promise of easy answers?
Rails also has an application level connection pool for the database but as I understand a connection pooler (pgbouncer et al) between PG and the application servers is still necessary when horizontally scaling.
A huge one is also to assume your opponent will make the best move. Don't just make one move threats hoping your opponent will miss them.

This seems like it should be somewhat more advanced, because players at a low level often will miss one move threats. But it is basically the first principle from which nearly all other good habits directly derive. Why develop all your pieces, not bring your queen out early, etc. Why do all those things when you know your opponent will often just miss something anyhow if you start pecking him with one move threats?

It's because if your opponent does not miss those threats, then you've likely just made your own position even weaker. And as a corollary a one-move threat which improves your position is perfectly fine of course, but in that case you're not hoping your opponent misses it. I mean you probably are, but you expect him to see it. But it doesn't matter - because your position has improved regardless.
no. they just released the Fitbit ace
(that was the joke...)
That's one of my personal rules for LLM usage too: "Don't commit code you couldn't explain to someone else" - https://simonwillison.net/2024/Jul/14/pycon/#pycon-2024.062....
What did they spend it on? I’m sure the next gen models will
still be better to train on that new infra
> I've seen hotheads as leaders

Of course. Nobody argued aggression isn’t effective. The argument is it isn’t the effective strategy, just one among many.

> See here on what an alpha is

You’re taking a definition that arose from animal observations and then filtered through anthropological and management academia. Colloquial, academic and industry definitions have diverged on this term; it’s probably being redefined in American English right now.

> Also for chickens, I've raised chickens

Chickens are the correct analogy. If you’re leading a team of people who remind you of chickens, leading with aggression works. (Not exaggerating. Some situations respond well to e.g. raising one’s voice or acting out frustration.)

As your sources show, that isn’t necessary for leadership.
This sounds like Scott Alexander's "Fashion explained with cellular automata" article, which was neat but probably not what OP was referring to and certainly not related to TFA in any way I can see. Still a good read tho.

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/22/right-is-the-new-left/
I agree, there's a lot of similarity there.

Although it sounds like that project, if successful, would've been pretty fantastic for computing in general. I'm far less interested to see proprietary models secure dominance, whichever country they're in.
Near anchorages there are lots of signs showing where cables land so boats can avoid dropping their anchors on them. Yet still it happens.

Anchors are something you drop when stationary or nearly stationary in order to stay stationary. They aren't something you drop accidentally as you are going along.

So legitimate accidental anchor damage is generally close shore.
Maybe you mean something like regular? I wouldn't call this sampling uniform.
Isn't this inviting a rapprochement with the mainland?

Not trying to be over dramatic about it, but given there is a persisting strand of belief inside the Taiwanese political community that unification ON THEIR TERMS is a thing, I would think at this point an unreliable US partner, who asks your principle worldwide income stream to relocate is .. not the friend you hoped for.

The writing was on the wall when "make some of the chips onshore" happened, and now with packaging long line looping, the next logical step will be "do some of the packaging onshore" followed by "no packaging or fab from offshore"

I wonder if the US government will next ask ASML holding to also open plants inside the continental USA? if I was the EU, I would consider very hard what a response would be.

"we are witholding Novo-nordisk product from the USA until bilateral trade relationships return to normal" is unlikely I guess. as is "decent Brie will not be available in the USA for the forseeable future"
Just look at how much insects get done with just a few neurons to run together...
Why is this being downvoted?

Fighting global warming and investing in clean tech is more important than funding ClosedAI and friends and making hyperteers and enshittificationers even richer than they already are.
Really it should be adjusted for global (or US) total market cap. Market cap tends to go up faster than inflation, so even if you adjust for inflation, it will still be skewed toward modern companies.
Markdown is a technical, not business tool? Gamers tend to be technical?
Unrelated to smartwatches, but the usual reason that I've heard on why video drivers are not open-sourced directly (AMDGPU =/= AMDGPU PRO and Nvidia's recent parallel driver efforts) is that there are copyright (old code that is not written by ATI/AMD or Nvidia/3dfx and AMD/Nvidia not getting the rights to it) and patent (techniques used may be patented by their competitors) concerns.
Related/submitted by the author:

We're bringing Pebble back

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42845091
Seems like your reasoning for how the next 2 years will go is a little slanted. And everyone in this thread is neglecting any demand issues stemming from market cycles.
When I catch an agent falling into a “debug loop” I ask it to summarize its understanding of the error. Next, I ask it to shift its context to a higher level in the code and look for patterns across my files which would impact {summary of error).

It isn’t foolproof but it has a much better success rate for me than letting it spin.
It's always been possible to "do (worse) AI on less compute". We've had years of open models! I also don't understand how anyone can see this as anything but good news for OpenAI. The ultimate value proposition of AI has always depended on whether it stretches to AGI and beyond, and R1 demonstrates that there's several orders of magnitude of hardware overhang. This makes it easier for OpenAI to succeed, not harder, because it makes it less likely that they'll scale to their financial limits and still fail to surpass humans.
It’s not even a question. I still have my Pebble Time Round in a box. No other watch has come close. That thing was probably under half the thickness and half the weight of my Apple Watch Ultra and yet it had 3x the battery life!

The physical controls were incredible… I actually controlled my music from that watch, because you could do it without looking. Who has ever controlled their music from an Apple Watch more than once a month? It’s so clunky and cumbersome, and you have to intently stare at what you’re doing — you might as you reach for your phone.

I can’t believe we’re a decade on, and the smartwatches that exist today are a joke compared to the PTR. The only practical improvement from my Apple Watch Ultra is the fitness tracking / health tracking sensor suite… which is great, but I miss having a good smartwatch, not just a fitness tracker.
Someone talk me down here, genuinely.

Combine this with the other tariffs, killing green manufacturing and the chips act and infrastructure bills, threatening our allies, a freeze on all federal grants and loans (a couple hours ago, if you aren't keeping up), etc... how does this not result in a total collapse of the US economy?

Tech is a significant portion of our market. How could destroying our ability to source the most advanced hardware and driving a wedge in between a critical ally who literally cannot concede for their national security possibly lead to anything but a lack of trust or confidence in the US, increased costs, and a shrinking market for US tech?
And will Congresspeople point out that they legislated the funds to go where the laws they passed dictate?
Ok maybe I should say it's not only the charge time, but also the e-ink (like?) display that captivates me. The fact that I can always look at my watch and see the time, other people can look at my watch and see the time. No flicks of the wrist required, no always on OLED display.

I honestly enjoy the Fossil Hybrid more than the Pebble Time, because it has an actual watch with a screen behind the hands.
> I’d argue that the most valuable companies of the AI era don’t exist yet. They’ll be the startups that harness AI’s potential to solve specific, costly problems across our economy—from engineering and finance to healthcare, logistics, legal, marketing, sales, and more.

I feel like the author's concluding point contradicts himself. There is a gold rush and OpenAI is selling shovels.
For that to be an issue here, there would have to be revenue from the Pebble line of products. Otherwise how would they show monetary loss?
Ask HN: Are people still writing commercial software for desktop PCs?
It seems that the vast majority of software I'm hearing about is targeting iOS, Android or embedded systems. Is anyone working on a software product that (a) targets a non-mobile, non-server device and (b) is for sale, as opposed to Open-source?
For Russian Forces in Ukraine It's Now Normal to Ride into Battle in Compact Car
The point is that this was developed outside of OpenAI.

So the real question is why does anyone believe that OpenAI will bring AGI when actual innovation was happening in some hedge fund in China while OpenAI was going on an international tour trying to drum up a trillion dollars.
> Can you guess what the next step will be?

He fixes the cable?

But seriously, video encoding isn't AI. Video encoding is a well understood problem. We can't even make "AI" that doesn't hallucinate yet. We're not sure what architectures will be needed for progress in AI. I get that we're all drunk on our analogies in the vacuum of our ignorance but we need to have a bit of humility and awareness of where we're at.
Suspects in 2 murder cases shared connection to 'Zizian' rationalist group
> Musk has his share of hypocrisy (why aren't you picking those to criticize him over?)

Because I'm not trying to criticize Elon Musk here, I'm trying to understand the cognitive dissonance between seeing two picture perfect sieg heils back to back and denying that that's what happened.

It seems like you agree that the motion is identical, but you are saying that it is a sieg heil but not a 'nazi salute' because elon musk "does not" support racism, advocate for cruelty, regulate speech, or centralize power.
Those neurons aren't anything remotely similar to a "neuron" in an LLM, for instance.
> Hedy also works on phones and tablets.

You shouldn't go mention that to the kids, it only gives them ideas...
Bullish on the use. Bearish on the profit margins for the big players.

If (big if!) I understand correctly, the ceiling for edge/local/offline AI has just blown off.
I'm 100% with you! No VCs this time...no mandatory cloud subscription. But I'm not really sure that this fear is grounded - before we sold to Fitbit we 'unlocked' the Pebble mobile app so you could use it with any cloud you wanted, including self hosted. So...it already meets your definition
This is an open-source tool. You can train and shape it however you want. You can teach it to behave like an SS soldier; you are free to do whatever you want. No one limits you. People forget that, or they bring their agendas. Therefore, no one cares what the other political views are; I can train it whatever I want.
Yeah, I mean, 9 women can make a baby in a month so why not?

Oh wait, it takes years to do all that and in the meantime you're wasting energy on not staying at the forefront of a hot tech trend.
You’re right! I got my wires crossed with Azure and AWS.
And you can even turn the viewpoint around and say that he is putting his money where his mouth is.