compumetrika

Get a Strix Point or Strix Halo with 128GB DDR5 RAM and you can run gpt-oss 120B at 10-20+ TPS.

Hmmm maybe I should re-read A Fire Upon the Deep.

Currently on the front page there are ~2/30 posts on the front page.

AI hype is everywhere. On HN there is genuinely much higher quality conversation about AI than many other places.

So, no, the question in the title doesn't resonate with me. I don't think there is an obsession, and for the AI discussion happens, I'm happy with the quality of it.

LLMs use pseudo-random numbers. You can set the seed and get exactly the same output with the same model and input.

Great quote, commenting just to 'bookmark' it.

Ollama can pull directly from HF, you just provide the URL and add to the end :Q8_0 (or whatever) to specify your desired quant. Bonus: use the short form url of `hf` instead of `huggingface` to shorten the model name a little in the ollama list table.

Edit: so for example of you want the unsloth "debugged" version of Phi4, you would run:

`$ollama pull hf.co/unsloth/phi-4-GGUF:Q8_0`

(check on the right side of the hf.co/unsloth/phi-4-GGUF page for the available quants)

Not all details are posted yet, but an interesting development.

I haven't tried this yet myself, but have you tried plugging it into GPT or Claude or Perplexity and asking Qs? I've made some progress on thongs this way, much faster than I would have the usual way. Apply the usual precautions about hallucinations etc (and maybe do the "ask multiple AIs the same thing" thing). We don't yet have a perfect tutor in these machines, but on balance I've gained from talking to them about deep topics.

The economist Emily Oster wrote an excellent series of books about pregnancy anf early kid years, where she dives into details about various studies, whether they are causal, etc. It's one of the best practiacl explainations of reading research I've encountered targeted at non-academics, really well done. She has a chapter on peanut exposure allergies and i think inrecall that these early-exposure results are in fact from causal research vs just correlational research (basically there are at least two types of papers out thwre -- correlational and causal. As you might guess causal is harder to get for many reasons). Great books; she may also have published some chapters on her substack (substack came after the book I think).

I realize as I write this that you are probably saying that for your own experience you can't disentangle correlational from causation, to which I would say -- correct!

I've directly experienced this in my own life. Moved during the pandemic to be near family, and coincidentally that is a much more religious and conservative community. Many people I am around daily are much more unplugged from online discussion and much more directly involved in face to face lives. There is a subset who are more "online" and tend to be more stressed/anxious.

Many great recommendations in the comments here about on emergent order in complex systems -- does anyone have recommendations for reading about how such systems de-organize?

Is there a proof or demostration somehwere about maximizing the consent of the governed?

Arrows theorem always has implied to me that the next step should be quantifuing some welfare measure for voters and then exploring which system maximized that welfare measure. "Consent of the governed" sounds like a welfare measure so I an intrigued.

> "Westworld was a warning, not an instruction manual!"