dvt

Or just.. download the books, and slap a search engine on top of them. It'll be like 10x smaller than the model. "Survival LLM" is absolutely a non-relevant use case.

Tried going through some random stuff on jumpstick, got like three 404s in a row, and I know Neocities, but it's just kind of meme-y, not really that interesting to scroll through.

There's some genuinely awesome stuff out there, but it's (paradoxically) much rarer imo than it was a decade ago. HN and Twitter is a place where it occasionally bubbles up.

> not one seems to have really stuck or set a new standard for web discovery

It's because most content worth seeing these days is behind a walled garden: Twitter, reddit, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, and even news articles these days are often paywalled. It's just a fundamentally different internet than it was in 2009. The corporations have definitively won.

One reason I personally like AI is that it at least puts the end-user on the same level (at least automation-, scraping-, and compute-wise) as big companies.

It's why unit tests are worthless when humans write them, and less than worthless when AI writes them. Same concept: you're testing yourself, of course you're going to pass with flying colors.

> What is today a moral imperative is not the same as what was moral 50/100 years ago

This is absolutely not true, and I would strongly suggest taking an ethics course. One of the most fascinating realities of the human condition is that it does seem that moral imperatives tend to be constant, the most obvious of which is the Golden Rule (which is at least 3000 years old), but there are many (the Ten Commandments or Hammurabi's Code are good jumping off points).

Non-mathematicians talking about this (especially in a cultural battleground like Wikipedia, yuck) will never be productive. Citing it here on HN does everyone a disservice. For those uninitiated, OpenAI used a fundamentally different method (without forcing in the Euler case) and the idea that the proof was plagiarized (other than the completely kosher strategy of using prior art, of course) is a complete fabrication.

In fact, the proof is such a mess, nobody really understands how it works. Which is becoming commomplace with these permutation machines where we can come up with something that passes some tests (e.g., a proof checker), but we have no idea wtf we did to get there, which doesn't really seem to do much to push human understanding forward.

It seems like such a dumb hill to die on, too. OpenAI literally stole the entire Internet (including copyrighted works), and we're arguing about a silly math puzzle.

This ship has sailed about two decades ago. At least let's get some cool products out of it.

Training a mid-size model like this can take anywhere between $500k to like $5m. Liquid is spending money on GPU-hours (not sure if you'd call that "energy"). The amortization question is harder to answer without knowing their financials.

The license doesn't really make much sense to me, because if you're already at $10m revenue, you can probably train your own (better, more tailor-suited) model, or at the very least raise money to do so.

This is super cool and thanks for open sourcing. I remember seeing CoScreen & Screen Hero here on HN years ago and thinking it was absolutely the cat's pajamas. Unfortunately, I think it was one of those cases of being blinded by the tech being super cool.

Of the ~decade since I've seen these types of apps, I've never used one and, frankly, I never ever craved for "just sharing one window" or "playing in multiplayer" as @jsherwani put it. Which is kind of odd, because COVID came and went (peak remote/screen sharing days), and I had totally forgotten these kinds of products even existed. While this is (still) super neat technically, I just don't really see a concrete use case other than "lemme show you something super cool."

Has anyone actually used it? Where would this kind of tool be better than just screen sharing over Google Meet or Discord or Slack or whatever?

> There’s nothing causational about the denomination.

You're right, I'm sure the people that are publishing these studies have never heard of "correlation is not causation."

> This shows people are using AI to make games that they know hardly anyone will play.

People have always done this tbh, I've probably built like a dozen+ games at game jams that even I barely remember.