ACCount36

10 ms·

91.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Now do that on your smartphone. And then on your smart watch. And then on your gaming console. Secure Boot being "a choice" on PC is an exception, not the norm. On just about every other device, the vendor is going to take a boot,
92.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Secure Boot is almost never a choice. It's just something a hardware vendor hits you with, whether you like it or not.
93.
by ACCount36 1y ago
No. That's an often-repeated bullshit excuse. Payment processors have ways of passing some of the chargeback risks onto the stores, and it's not like Steam itself is chargeback central. If you just want free games, pirating them i
94.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Take an iPhone or a Switch. Then disable Secure Boot on it. Good fucking luck. The reason why Apple or Nintendo go out of their way to make this impossible isn't user security. It's the "security" of their 30% App Store
95.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Who controls the fucking certs? "My computer was compromised with an early boot stage hypervisor backdoor" happens basically never. It's an attack vector that exists almost entirely in the minds of infosec fucktards. "My
96.
by ACCount36 1y ago
One of the big advantages US has is that it's on the receiving end of brain drain. A lot of the best talent worldwide wants to go to US, learn in the US and work in the US.
97.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Apple used to be at the edge of AI. They shipped Siri before "AI assistant" went mainstream, they were one of the first to ship an actual NPU in consumer hardware and put neural networks into features people use. They were spearhe
98.
by ACCount36 1y ago
The bottleneck for general purpose robots is, and always was, AI. We've been in a continuous AI breakthrough since 2022. In 2000, this kind of thing was nonexistent.
99.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Secure Boot is the computing antichrist, and Linux folk were 100% right to rally against it. As well as a whole bunch of other "Trusted Computing" garbage.
100.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Real world isn't "reliable". If a robot can't correct for errors, it's not going to survive out there.
101.
by ACCount36 1y ago
...that's how it was in year 2020. What you're missing is: today, we're nearing the point where actual general purpose robots become viable. Which means: the purpose of a robot is no longer to sit at a factory line and precis
102.
by ACCount36 1y ago
LLMs are already capable of complex behavior. They are capable of goal-oriented behavior. And they are already capable of carrying out the staples of instrumental convergence - such as goal guarding or instrumental self-preservation. We als
103.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Huh, I overestimated SLS? My bad - I think I must have used Block 2 numbers by accident. Thanks for the correction. My point stands though: no Artemis mission has plans to launch a full Apollo style capsule + lander stack. Artemis HLS, Spac
104.
by ACCount36 1y ago
"Full price"? LLM inference is currently profitable. If you don't even know that, the entire extent of your "expertise" is just you being full of shit. >Simply put these systems are NOT dynamic, they can not modi
105.
by ACCount36 1y ago
The fuck are you yapping on about? A hitherto unknown limit to scaling laws? GPU compute being discounted - as opposed to in a massive fuckoff "people would kill for an H200" shortage at all times? What are your sources on that? A
106.
by ACCount36 1y ago
In your lifetime? Probably. In 2027? Fat fucking chance. That deadline is never going to hold - too many things are just nowhere near ready. By now, I expect NET 2030.
107.
by ACCount36 1y ago
If there was one good thing to come out of this administration, it was Jared Isaacman who would just axe Gateway, SLS and Orion. Now, it seems like even that might end up not happening. What a shitshow.
108.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Oh, they know it. Saturn V was less powerful than SLS - but it could send an entire mission in a single launch. Capsule, lander and all. A lot of what NASA has been doing with SLS is just trying to... rationalize its existence. This is what
109.
by ACCount36 1y ago
By Gary Marcus, of course. If he claims that giving LLMs a Python interpreter is a huge win for his paradigm, then major AI companies have been "winning" since 2022.
110.
by ACCount36 1y ago
It's a very funny read. "See, LLMs that are allowed to use Python perform better than ones that aren't, and Python is symbolic, so I was right all along!" Looks like a surrender to me.
111.
by ACCount36 1y ago
It's not "their" Achilles heel. It's the Achilles heel of the way humans work. Most top-of-their-field researchers are on top of their field because they really love it, and are willing to sink insane amount of hours int
112.
by ACCount36 1y ago
This comment is absolute bullshit. It starts off being wrong ("Opus 4 has maxed out LLM coding performance"), then keeps being wrong ("LLM inference is sold at a loss"), and tries to mask just how wrong it at any point i
113.
by ACCount36 1y ago
The year is 1985. Internet is coming. You don't want it to. Can you stop it?
114.
by ACCount36 1y ago
No. The links between the satellites are lasers, but the user traffic still goes up and down over radio. You still need the Starlink coverage to be enabled on system level, and the local government to care enough to track down Starlink user
115.
by ACCount36 1y ago
In sane code, there are more function calls than there are functions. Imagine, now, that there's a function at 0x1337, and it's called from 69 different places in the code. If we're using relative addresses, this would, of co
116.
by ACCount36 1y ago
One classic transformation for executable code is to convert memory offsets to absolute addresses for compression. Absolute addresses are more compressible than relative ones. Probably the single oldest trick in the code compression book.
117.
by ACCount36 1y ago
Cisco was the quintessential dot-com bubble company. Back then, it was what Nvidia is today: at the very spearhead of investors rallying behind the Internet. "Good company" is subjective, but to argue that the company that built t
118.
by ACCount36 1y ago
"Brute force" is only held back by economics and hardware limitations. There are still massive gains to be had from scaling up - but frontier training runs have converged on "about the largest model that we can fit into our e
119.
by ACCount36 1y ago
If they want to go to war over geoengineering efforts done by someone else, then yes. They can sit on their asses, but going against people who actually try to do something to address climate change is a step too far.
120.
by ACCount36 1y ago
If countries prefer that nothing would be done about climate change, they can go get bombed for all I care.

More ›