ElectricalUnion

The "general adoption agent" for Earendil is their other product Lefos, that is based on Pi and uses email as the interface.

What you meant by "single effective character" is grapheme clusters. This whole discussion is about variable sized code points.

Jevons paradox, technological improvements that increase the efficiency of a resource's use lead to a rise in total consumption of that resource.

Isn't Fable intentionally trained and system prompted to act maliciously and attempt to sabotage third party attempts to use it to train or improve other LLMs?

The only (still in prototype stage!) "competitor" for those GB10/Ryzen Al Max+ 395 (in my region, borderline unobtainable) systems seems to be the Xiaomi AI Cube.

Isn't Fable intentionally trained and system prompted to act maliciously and attempt to sabotage third party attempts to use it to train other LLMs?

Can I block providers (for model, not in general) that have sightly cheaper input/output tokens but have more that 10x the average cache cost?

Can I block providers (for a model, not in general) that set up cache write cost when the mode is free cache writes?

> But they are.

Did you remember to:

- check for the other spawned process exit code?

- waitpid for all process in the other process chain?

- propagate/handle signals, like for example SIGINT/SIGTSTP/SIGPIPE/SIGHUP forward and back signals?

- change stdio buffering mode?

- remember to count how many bytes actually were written by write, and blocking if not, before clobbing the 64kb of the pipe buffer size with another write?

- flush, then close all file descriptors left behind by the pipes when it ends?

It's for reasons like that, that I don't trust anything non-trivial, not-shell to use pipelines correctly.

Using macos on low memory regimes will make it use disk-based swap.

For example, a Macbook Neo (so in theory, something with around 4GiB of free RAM lying around) might eat around 900GB of writes a day while not doing much at all, because it's basically on low on RAM and swapping all the time.

> If not for NAT, we'd all need a firewall

A NAT implementation could broadcast any "WAN" side incoming packets to all link local clients (aka: put everyone in the DMZ). The only thing preventing that is a stateful firewall.

If you're using specifically zstd, on the sender side, instead of tweaking the whole tunnel once, you can use --adapt to dynamically adjust to i/o conditions.

> PIM would have a full blown IO controller and cache subsystem to fetch remote operands

Don't we already have those in mainstream computing in the form of dedicated silicon in DMA controllers? Programmed input–output performance is often low throughput, high jitter and uses a lot of CPU.

Qwen3 is not Qwen3.8?

> commited on May 21, 2025, over 1 year ago

Fairly old update to the README.md of (instead of Qwen3.8), should have raised some flags?