byko3y

5 ms·

1.
by byko3y 8mo ago
RWKV and Mamba families LLM-s have recurrent blocks instead of attention, and they get really close to performance of Transformer on small scale. What you've probably tried was some outdated tech. The biggest advantage of Transformer i
2.
The Core Flaws of Modern AI Based on Large Language Models(bykozy.me)
2 points by byko3y 8mo ago|2 comments
3.
State of decay in self-hosted commenting (code review)(bykozy.me)
4 points by byko3y 10mo ago|0 comments
4.
What Are Microservices? (Seriously)(bykozy.me)
2 points by byko3y 10mo ago|0 comments
5.
by byko3y 10mo ago
For some reason people from C/C++ world seem to be oblivious to persistent data structures. Those don't need locks, you just swap a single pointer.
6.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>the things that Rust prevents me from handling safely because of its own limitations rather than them being fundamentally unsafe are quite rare, and even with those, they tend to be things that I would be quite likely to mess up in prac
7.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>I'm curious how you came to that conclusion. It seems wrong both on a theoretical level (Drop/unwinding/catch_unwind should obviously suffice for at least some cases?) and on a practical level (tokio can recover from work
8.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>Maybe you DON'T need that state to be shared, reference-counted, or heap allocated. Maybe you can refactor your code to get rid of those annoyingly hard to deal with abstractions. And you end up with better, more reliable, likely f
9.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>Rust turns unknown failures in C and C++ into known failures and suddenly the C/C++ people start caring about the failures I'm actually the one who promotes paranoidal assert-s everywhere. I do agree the original statement fro
10.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>Not a fact. Particularly in the embedded world, crashing is preferable to malfunctioning, as many embedded devices control things that might hurt people, directly or indirectly. It really depends on how deeply Turing you mechanism is. B
11.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>I would love to hear what he thinks a good programming language is, because I can easily pick more holes in any other language than he has. I have a working theory that the classic programming is basically dying out: https://
12.
by byko3y 10mo ago
Why would I do this and why do you think I did? Or do you feel like my english is so bad I'm probably writing ransom note out of pieces of LLM output? I can ensure you I'm good enough at typing and talking in english to not requir
13.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>Do not misrepresent them and pretend that the Rust developers are incompetent or malicious. I'm sorry, but I sensirely think the Rust designer did a sloppy work by reimplementing C++ flaws with a new syntax. The history repeats its
14.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>Compile speed. Why do people care so much? Use debug for correctness and iterating your code. You're hardly going to change much between runs, and you'll get an incremental compile. What's the largest Rust-based public co
15.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>"D supports Ownership and Borrowing, just like Rust. DMD, D's reference compiler, can compile itself in less than 5 seconds, thanks to a fast frontend and fast backend. D is easy to metaprogram through traits and templates. Yo
16.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>Yeah sure, but what compares that gives you similar perf, safety, and language features to Rust? I've already answered it in the original article — Rust is already here, and better language is not. Still, it will not make me say &q
17.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>You can throw in a destructor [1]. You just need to mark that destructor noexcept(false). You do get a guaranteed std::terminate if an exception escapes a destructor while unwinding is already underway, though. Come on, please tell me y
18.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>There are two conclusions: 1) If Cloudflare hadn't decided on a proper failure mode for this (i.e. a hardcoded fallback config), the end result would've been the same: a bunch of 500s, and 2) most programs wouldn't have b
19.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>Yeah until that memory safety issue causes memory corruption in a completely different area of code and suddenly you're wasting time debugging difficult-to-diagnose crashes once they do start to surface. Some very solid argument he
20.
by byko3y 10mo ago
It's 200% LLM used in production — like 10 hours of dialogs right before writing the article. I had much more hours of coversations with Rust fanboys and it was mostly a waste of time, they just would not try to negotiate on Rust'
21.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>I've done significant C++ and Rust and Rust compiles WAY faster than C++ for day-to-day incremental compilation. C++ suffers from the header inclusion problem and modules may as well not exist because you can't practically use
22.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>Eventually I rewrote my btree on top of Vecs. My node & leaf pointers are now array indices. The result? There is no longer any unsafe code. The code has become significantly simpler and it now runs ~10% faster than it did before, w
23.
by byko3y 10mo ago
On the other hand, lets face it: most of the time security in IT systems is the least priority. I mean after shipping fast, iterate fast, better performance, compatibility, architecture soundness (whatever it is), convenient tests, docs wit
24.
by byko3y 10mo ago
Man, I explained it in the first sentence of the article — it's not bad, it's much worse than it could have been. The main body of the article is not hate — it's plain facts. Everybody working on a significant Rust codebase a
25.
by byko3y 10mo ago
There are programming languages/models/runtimes that crash and recover, there are models that gracefully degrade. Rust cannot recover. Neither can C++ in many cases e.g. when you have an exception in a destructor then it's a
26.
by byko3y 10mo ago
>ORMs, OOP, Git, JavaScript bloat, Linux vs Windows ORM and OOP whine is niche, agreed. Linux vs Windows is irrelevant because windows runs linux nowadays — I don't think I've read a single article about it. Git? Okay, mostly c
27.
by byko3y 10mo ago
Yeah, the article was written in Markdown, LLM-s employ markdown formatting too. It's not a typical length of LLM response — it's approx 1.5-2.0 times longer than a typical long LLM response. Not easily noticable to a human being
28.
by byko3y 10mo ago
Because it follows same structure as the one used by LLM-s. At least there is a reason to think so — before you've tried to actually read the article and realize LLM-s just don't write text like this... yet. Of course, this struct
29.
by byko3y 10mo ago
Funny question, considering the fact I've posted a link to my recent article onto the main page. I employ LLM-s a lot. Few days ago I made an experiment — put my article into Qwen and asked to evaluate it for LLM-generated content. To
30.
by byko3y 10mo ago
My firefox automatically installed perplexity search engine — it's actually much better in for just searching the web. Or use Grok. If you need to generate content there are lots of better AI-s which do not limit request rate as heavil

More ›