troupo

6 ms·

1.
by troupo 4d ago
> Silicon design does not have the same time scale than software. "Neural Engine" has been a part of iPhones since 2017 . So, in development since at least 2013, possibly earlier. And it targeted the rather well established, k
2.
by troupo 5d ago
There are two motions you can do. One is the "smile". When you smile, your ears (mostly the lower part, the lobule) go up. You can isolate the muscles that pull the skin/ear and donit without smiling. The other one is the &qu
3.
by troupo 5d ago
ML research was a rather known quantity, or the separate "Neural Engine" CPU explicitly aimed at existing ML pipelines wouldn't exist. However, very few used it for anything, even within Apple. I feel like it was a huge waste
4.
by troupo 5d ago
> I see where you are coming from but the argument would be stronger is Google Chrome refused to open illegal streaming sites etc. Why would it be stronger? Google has a near-monopoly on search. > If I ask Siri to give me a link to il
5.
by troupo 5d ago
> Being second or third in AI usage is worth a lot, one's private data matters very little in comparison. what does this even mean
6.
by troupo 5d ago
For some reason I forget Android TVs :) In my mind it's always Samsung, LG, Roku etc. :)
7.
by troupo 5d ago
All apps on smart TVs are browser apps. Some, like Youtube, get special privileges (that is, can run their own app), but also need to run some kind of UI since TVs have no standard UI libraries. Youtube decided to run a stripped down versio
8.
by troupo 6d ago
> Is it because the models are inherently not deterministic This is the main reason (and yes, many modern compilers and CPUs carry some non-determinism which actually quite well explained and specified). > But then, will it not get be
9.
by troupo 6d ago
I constantly do various greenfield side projects for myself and friends. I feel like need much more precise instructions much earlier in the process now than when I was building in February.
10.
by troupo 6d ago
Anthropic broke their models in spring, denied it, gaslighted everyone who said so, and then all but admitted it: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/april-23-postmortem (basically doing Anthropic things). > I hon
11.
by troupo 6d ago
> Instead of simply saying 'implement themes in my product' you need to be specific, in fact more specific than usual. Around February you could get away with very vague prompts to Claude. I feel like models have regressed sinc
12.
by troupo 6d ago
> Is it likely to get better with time. Also yes. There are no signs to show that. If anything, the new models produce worse code, only significantly faster
13.
by troupo 6d ago
People keep saying that "models are just compilers, and I don't see you complsining about compilers". Which is such a bullshit argument
14.
by troupo 7d ago
Quote: "Watching this Apple event tout how iPhones will soon be able to record ambient audio/conversations and transcribe "high level notes" for you. It's billed as private and end-to-end encrypted, but I think the
15.
by troupo 7d ago
> The problem isn't that the LLM generated that text, the problem is that a human didn't read it properly and ask what that meant and fix it before pushing. The amount of garbage AI generates quickly overwhelms the human. The w
16.
by troupo 8d ago
If it was "very clear", OpenAI wouldn't be threatening the researcher with "it's very bad for your career" or state "we can't tell you if it was trained on user input". Additionally, according to
17.
by troupo 8d ago
I feel like all Looney Tunes movies are that: not too funny and drawn out. A complete aside: nothing wrong with that. A forgettable afternoon entertainment is also fine. And it ahouldn't be delegated to Illumination near-monopoly on it
18.
by troupo 8d ago
> What the OpenAI person involved is claiming is that they wanted the outside researcher(s) to put their name on OpenAI's work > If true, that's generous and beyond the level of generosity one should expect "We highly l
19.
by troupo 8d ago
> The goal of generative UI should be to make software more personal while preserving the workflows people already know. These are inherently contradictory statements. When people actually did research instead of vibe-coding, they learne
20.
by troupo 9d ago
For those wondering, TL is Torrentleech
21.
by troupo 10d ago
> I think it's much easier to pay 12 bucks for a month of seedbox that includes an invite to TL Yes, it's probably easier. My quick search revealed no such seedboxes.
22.
by troupo 11d ago
> Can google justify why are they doing this? Look at Google's earnings reports and see what constitutes 80-90% of their revenues and profits
23.
by troupo 11d ago
It's convenient that "zombie processes" only retain data for Google-owned sites https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49583517
24.
by troupo 11d ago
It's amazing how it held up over 20-ish years. You'd think it would only get worse after removing mandatory registration 10 or so years ago. And yet...
25.
by troupo 12d ago
Sadly, curated public ones are also harder and harder to find (for obvious reasons) :(
26.
by troupo 12d ago
So. Easy to get into is: "some unspecified mid-tier trackers may or may not give out accounts to some unspecified seedbox providers". It's probably easier to lurk in r/trackerinvites (or whatever it's called) hoping
27.
by troupo 12d ago
Buying a seedbox doesn't get you into a private tracker. It's a download client.
28.
by troupo 12d ago
> The best way is always private trackers. They're easy to get into If they were easy to get into, they wouldn't be good
29.
by troupo 12d ago
Nope. Simpler externalities. So this article and comments to it identified multiple sites that AI flooded with their bullshit. GitHub has been strained beyond breaking with slop AI PRs. Multiple open-source developers get burnt out by the d
30.
by troupo 12d ago
Externalities of AI will only get worse before they get even worse.

More ›