vb-8448

4 ms·

31.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
I find curios that Astra's pelicans are basically the same (yellow sun top right corner, green bike, same bike shape, same legs style, very similar background) while in other there is more randomness.
32.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Played in codex app a couple of hours today: it feels much faster than SOL, even if the TPS is half of it.
33.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
But someone could probably build a harness what will be able to do play the game.
34.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
But scored less on V2 and V1 ... too much overfitting?
35.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
It's not a criticism, I was really looking forward to trying out such a powerful model at this speed. But I burn my 5$ allowance in 10 minutes ... and only because I was hitting rate limits, without it would probably be less than a min
36.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Imagine Luna at 10x tps and 1/100 of current cost. At that point you will be able to "brute force" basically everything. IMO also a lot of problems with memory and context rot will be solved too.
37.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
At that speed it's too pricey for agentinc tasks.
38.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Am I the only that thinks that anything similar to AGI will come not from raw model capacity but from model speed and efficiency? In my experience the harness is more important than the model, and anything able to run at 700tps will be the
39.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
The author's job description is literally "Staff Software Engineer at OpenTeams. Dask maintainer."!
40.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
I agree on the past, when you have limited resource and have to print something on paper that you cannot recall to fix you have to carefully choose the layout. But that era is gone since decades, nowadays, given how easy it is, it's a
41.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
> Only if you aren't schooled in reading graphs ... So we can say the same about the authors "AA’s plot is misleading" claim, he is "not schooled in reading graphs"? > How exactly would you zoom into a section
42.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
It gives you a wrong perspective, especially if you are distracted, on model capabilities: Fable 5.1 is not 30% better than Sol, but is the very first impression you get when you look at the first graph. If I'm not wrong OAI tried a si
43.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Y-axis is between 0 and 100. But even if it was between 0 and Inf+, it still gives you a wrong perspective, especially if you are not paying attention, on model capabilities.
44.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Tried one of simonwillison's pelicans: We didn’t find any signs this file was processed by Claude!
45.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
IMO in this case is mandatory to start from 0 because it alters the visual perception. Just look at the first chart: the distance between Fable 5.1 and Sol is <5%, but it looks like 25 or 30%.
46.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Complaining about "bad charting" and posting a chart with y-axis that doesn't start at 0 is kinda weird.
47.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
My bet is that mistral models will suddenly start to shine.
48.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Me neither, but this is exactly my point: nowadays, no one will trust an "overnight word written in rust", unless someone prove that an "overnight word written in rust" is good enough. And big AI LABs, with basically inf
49.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
I think it's not possible with humans in a relatively SHORT amount of time (let's say 1 year).
50.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Same mistake over and over again: zitron job is not "making successfully predictions", he is a content creator. For him, it's enough to be right once, even in 3 years from now.
51.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
A full implementation/rewrite of something like word, which is pretty complex and the quantity of edge cases is insane, in a relatively short amount of time, months, is very hard. If they succeed with AI it will be huge: it's basi
52.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Well, this one is particularly obvious, other one are more fuzzy.
53.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
But in case they succeed the return on image will be astonishing.
54.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Curiously, I didn't find any reference in the Open source licences section of the codex app. Is this a MPL 2.0 violation?
55.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
No way staff, complex liquid cooling and everything else is going to cost more than the hardware itself. All articles that I found on "ai datacenters cost breakdown" say that >60% is for the HW inside.
56.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
The main issue HTMX address is reducing complexity and LLMs doesn't solve it. I'd expect it to be the other way around: LLMs will increase HTMX(and similar solutions) adoption because alongside of being excellent at writing HTMX t
57.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Imagine a house full of racks of gpus!
58.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Imagine a house full of racks of gpus!
59.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
Maybe 67% is too much, but the GPUs are the most expensive thing in all those datacentres. Anyway, according to the latest articles[0], 1000B is the lower bound. [0] https://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/ai-infrastructure-i
60.
by vb-8448 1mo ago
The projected ai capex for this and next years is above 1000b/year. 673b/year doesn't sound so weird, if they manage to spent so much, obviously.

More ›