To answer the question posed in the header of this report, it’s apparent that using open models is indeed the approach offering the biggest savings, followed by smart model routing. Spending controls and context optimization also bear down on costs, but they don’t come close to the first two techniques in results.
In most of the world there is: no real willingness to solve problems nor an acceptance of people offering to solve their problems (out of pride) simply too much regulation so the problem cannot be solved without a license or long approval time very low standards of what is deemed acceptable so the problem isn't seen as a problem in the first place
What is the underlying hardware capable of doing at its theoretical peak? And then you measure the delta between that theoretical maximum and what you have achieved.
Could this phrase or sentence or paragraph or section be improved, even a little? That is, can I make myself (on this very localized turf) make myself dislike it less?
I think some research, again it's correlational, shows that people who spend, you know, 5 hours a week with their grandchildren have improved memory. So that seems we don't know if it's causal, but it's interesting that those who spend more than 20 hours a week don't show this benefit. In fact, might show the opposite.
You look under the underneath though at the code and it was just a horrible unmaintainable mess. But the fact that people could program the programs that they wanted was a a significant step forward as opposed to I'm going to write a thousandpage requirements document and then wait 8 years and not get what I want which was the alternative that we were offering at the at the time.
A good book sweeps a corner of your brain. Clears out a stale assumption. Disturbs the ecosystem of old ideas you've been letting accumulate rent-free.
Between Hopper and Blackwell from the transistors themselves, call it 75%. It was 3 years apart. 75%. Blackwell is 50 times hopper. My point is architecture matters.
So even though the models have improved tremendously and if you give them an agentic task, they will just go for hours and move mountains for you. And then you ask for like a joke and it has a stupid joke. It's crappy joke from five years ago and it's because it's outside of the it's outside of the RL.
I think that might be what saves us. I think the fact that no, you can't have one engineer and have him do a thousand projects because after three hours of that he's going to literally pass out in a corner.
Some other comparison is like, Opus is like the coworker that is a little silly sometimes, but it's really funny and you keep him around. And Codex is like the, the weirdo in the corner that you don't wanna talk to, but is reliable and gets shit done.
These corner allocations create a distinct source of cross-market misallocation, separate from the aggregate quantity loss (the Harberger triangle) and from within-market misallocation emphasized in prior work.
The internet is unique in the history of technology because there’s a list of things it improved (communication, access to information) but another list of things it likely made worse for almost everybody
this is a very deep truth about habits, which is a habit must be established before it can be improved. You know, it has to become the standard in your life before you can scale it up and optimize and turning it into something more. You need to standardize before you optimize.
The best book I read this year was also the last book I reviewed (and yes, I snuck the review under the wire for that reason): Bethany Jacobs's This Brutal Moon, the conclusion of the Kindom Trilogy that started with These Burning Stars. I thought the first two books of the series were interesting but flawed, but the conclusion blew me away and improved the entire trilogy in retrospect. Like all books I rate 10 out of 10, I'm sure a large part of my reaction is idiosyncratic, but two friends of mine also loved the conclusion so it's not just me.
If you have a nation of 1 million people and you are ruling over hundreds of millions of people, hundreds of millions of people, China, Russia, the Middle East, you do not do that through warfare. You conquer them initially through warfare, but you do not rule them through warfare. You've got to be offering something that they want, something that they like.
As AI gets more capable, the risks associated with mistaken claims, fraudulent claims, or too-vague-to-be-verified claims will increase, and a cloud of suspicion between competitors could drive corner-cutting (indeed, this is happening already and could get worse).
Contrary to some people’s beliefs, companies do not in fact have sufficient incentives to mitigate all major risks, and competition is driving corner-cutting that needs to be reined in somehow.
The cost to discover and develop a drug today is orders of magnitude higher than in the 1950s. Despite this, the probability that a drug entering clinical trials will eventually reach the market has hardly improved in the intervening years.
This book surveys theories of creativity, contrasting four competing explanations: expertise, genius, society, and chance, in offering a model for how creativity works. Simonton's work provides a nice hybrid between the purely anecdotal work of biographers and the data-driven work of experimental scientists.
A number of commentators have consistently predicted that solar cost improvements will level out “this year” since about 1990, and yet if anything deployment, cost decline, and the learning rate have only improved.
Mind candy: Military SF by someone who must've spent a big chunk of time in the (US?) military. The novel is good on the inter-personal dynamics of the service and especially of the small ship.
Part autobiography, part startup + life philosophy, and part product book, I could have categorized this in a few sections. However, the strength of this book is clearly the advice and insights for how Scott's 7+ year journey led to a fantastically successful exit to Adobe for his startup, Behance. The middle of the book is a great mix of anecdotes and tactical things you can apply if your startup is in "the Messy Middle" to turn the corner for your product.
Here's a new one that's worth consideration: the ZOLEO Satellite Communicator ($200, 5.3 oz), which debuted in January. It's well priced, constructed, and engineered; and it offers a significantly improved messaging experience for both the owner and their contacts.
At first glance the Fastball struck me as a humble offering, but it quickly grew on me. Mostly after I started to carry and use it. I wasn't immediately impressed when I pulled the Fastball from it's box, and as a collectible I'd probably pass. But as a user piece I can easily recommend it.
It's a really great read. I read this in two days when my life was very busy, and I really shouldn't have been taking time off to sit in the corner and read, but I just kept wanting to return to it because I was marvellously entertained and engaged by it.
I've put a little circular side table next to it which is perfect for a glass of wine or whisky, alongside an Artemide Tolomeo floor lamp; it's my own little corner of modernist bliss.
Let me close by offering a sincere thanks to those in the Rust community who have been working so long to develop such a terrific piece of software – and especially those who have worked so patiently to explain their work to us newcomers.
It was probably the first book in English to bring serious academic scrutiny to Chinese food culture, and to use the scholarly techniques applied to other subjects to food, offering the views of different experts on different periods of Chinese history.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.