vikramkr

7 ms·

1.
by vikramkr 4d ago
There are plenty of other cases (e.g. ultra rare diseases) where we don't do RCTs for various practical reasons. So it's not really a problem of the existing framework - there's a ton of room for "we can't do an rct
2.
by vikramkr 4d ago
I would argue there is a very clear unambiguously correct choice of wording for that case. The setting was opt out. It's a binary concept and which case it's in is determined by the default given no user action. If it is opt in, t
3.
by vikramkr 6d ago
IMO building a harness is not wildly difficult (customize pi?) but the offerings from openai and anthropic are wildly subsidized in the subscriptions so they win by default if you want frontier capabilities. Glm 5.3 flash is great but it&#x
4.
by vikramkr 7d ago
In the openai api and many other rapid you can pretty trivially pin not only the model but also the specific snapshot you want to use by using the model id for that snapshot. It's not that big a deal and has been available for years
5.
by vikramkr 7d ago
Often via api you can pin to the specific snapshot. Yes the model provider can screw you over - it's physically possible for many vendors to screw you over, that doesn't mean that's not a dick move and that you can't exp
6.
by vikramkr 7d ago
These models have specific behavioral characteristics trained into them from reinforcement learning and prompts optimized for one aren't guaranteed to transfer to the new generation. Think if the difference between gpt 5.4 and 5.5 and
7.
by vikramkr 8d ago
> Replicating a paper is just as valuable scientifically as publishing it, but how many careers advance through replication? A lot. In fields where knowledge is incrementally building on previous work the reason the whole field hasn&#x27
8.
by vikramkr 8d ago
Not an expert by any means but the assumption here as I understand it is that the arxiv worthy PDF would not be acceptable or meaningful for impossible to understand proofs. And the lean proof would be meaningless unless the specific expres
9.
by vikramkr 9d ago
Can't speak for op for but me no - it was just ingrained as something disrespectful to do to books. Sometimes you've got a taboo like eating with your left hand that has a pretty clear reason for coming into existence (you use you
10.
by vikramkr 12d ago
I mean yeah. Nuclear waste is much safer than fossil fuel waste - deaths caused, radioactivity, etc
11.
by vikramkr 14d ago
I'm so confused by the point you're trying to make. There's a lot of rhetoric about Georgia and an investigation about how the country list is 1:1 with some mysterious list from 1996 - but like - it's an export control l
12.
by vikramkr 14d ago
> the intent is good What is that supposed to mean? They're trying to be an llm search engine that's not some radical new concept
13.
by vikramkr 14d ago
no the answer is `npx ccusage` or any of the other of the trillion ways to see how many tokens you're getting and what the current subsidization rates are.
14.
by vikramkr 14d ago
no the $200/mo subs are definitely infinitely cheaper. If you're stuck paying enterprise API prices though that's not the case. So for personal or business premium plan use there's no competition but api rate/enterp
15.
by vikramkr 16d ago
if you're one of those enterprises it's perfectly reasonable to assume you're more likely to go have your procurement and legal teams negotiate with google for one of those weird boxes to run gemini on prem ( https:/&#x2
16.
by vikramkr 16d ago
>"the majority of the market for Apple devices does trust that they will not produce and sell a computer incapable of support their use" the problem with that argument is that the vision pro exists, where they clearly overestim
17.
by vikramkr 16d ago
I don't think you need the scare quotes. product lifecycles can take years and the actual neo demand was actually pretty insane. They were using it to soak up demand for binned a18 chips and it would have been irresponsible to forecast
18.
by vikramkr 16d ago
I mean that's mostly true in theory - and we're assuming good faith from the author of the blog that they were honest and clear in their communications of course (definitely strongly agree with you on that point). But that's
19.
by vikramkr 16d ago
They were worried it would make it easy to generate a flood of misinformation. They were correct.
20.
by vikramkr 16d ago
Google was at least trying. Wouldn't be surprised if the others were experimenting with it too. The bar is going to be a lot higher now for for any diffusion model to go from experiment to product since it needs to compete with stuff l
21.
by vikramkr 16d ago
That's like 3 and a half years away? I can see that - fabs don't get built overnight and bubbles aren't under any obligation to pop on a timeline. Wild that 2030 is not that far away. Sometimes it feels like we never left 202
22.
by vikramkr 17d ago
It's a new culture. Combination of AI making junior engineers redundant, new grad skill levels cratering if they used AI to skate their way through college, and filtering through job applications being functionally impossible with huge
23.
by vikramkr 17d ago
That is a _very_ optimistic view of both the power dynamic at play and that level of accountability executives in that context would face. This is a company that previously had no developer - so being the person who best understands the cod
24.
by vikramkr 17d ago
I really doubt they would have changed their policy for either of those lol. It's easiest to go along with whoever is in charge - they aren't in the business of overtly challenging the political order - they have lobbyists for tha
25.
by vikramkr 17d ago
This is standard practice no? Anything with disputed names they show whatever name is the official one in the user's region. This renaming is absolute garbage but he is the president and Congress isn't doing anything so it is what
26.
by vikramkr 18d ago
Weird article. Feels very 2025 for a 2026 article (both in ways it reads too anti AI to me and ways it seems not critical enough of ai) >Also stop saying “please” to an LLM. It does not have any feelings. It emulates having feelings and
27.
by vikramkr 18d ago
> "I joined this company after they'd gone a stretch without any developer, and the bug queue showed it." I think maybe if you're at a company like that, you should be very cautious in suggestions/timeline/e
28.
by vikramkr 19d ago
"I stopped using software x for y" > Blog post clearly generated by software x
29.
by vikramkr 24d ago
I find that I remember models being a lot better than they were, even when I remember them being not very good - because of a novelty factor ("whoa it can do that now?") mostly. And then I go back and look at them and its like, wh
30.
by vikramkr 24d ago
With that amount of usage - do you use fable for subagents and workflows? It turns out that even if you set it to not auto switch to opus 4.8 on flag, it does auto switch if its a subagent and that's a lot less visible. I was trying to

More ›