Recent submissions

Comment · 20 hours ago
I think the point is to decide where to draw the line. An AI model is a stochastic process, you don't get the same results from the same prompt (even at temperature 0 because the GPU will do multiplications in a different order and errors compound). It's not really the same as a digital compositing pipeline and a lighting engine.

Also you have to account for the PB of training data which consists of copyrighted works that goes into the model and is interpolated to produce the result. Personally this tips the balance to AI output being new work that's not copyrightable for me because otherwise all of the people who own copyright on the training data should have joint copyright of the output too because in a sense all of the training data is part of the prompt too.

Your prompt doesn't really contain all of the decisions that were made in the final output most of the time. When you use a rendering engine it does contain only your decisions and you have a license to use the work of all the people who created the software and other assets you're using to make the film.

Comment · 25 days ago
Hilarious that you think anyone wants to play your AI generated game much less pay for it
Comment · 1 month ago
That doesn't really help it's just more stuff to review and question if it makes any sense at all
Comment · 1 month ago
Computable includes BPP
Comment · 1 month ago
But how will you know that the query plan actually does what your query asked for?
Comment · 2 months ago
You could set the CSS zoom property to 1/window.devicePixelRatio with JavaScript but I think you can't do it with CSS only. If you do that then px is physical px. This doesn't include browser zoom though or mobile pinch to zoom. You could also get those with JavaScript but then people would be really confused by the behavior of your website.

You definitely can't get pure integers though it's always a float even if you use whole numbers. It does eventually get rounded before becoming pixels though.

Comment · 2 months ago
Comment · 2 months ago
But what does it mean? The theorems are just symbols in lean. The conjectures humans chose are carefully selected to be the questions that are interesting and relevant to our intuition about the real world.

Math often doesn't have applications for hundreds of years and that application is only possible because people deeply understand it and how it applies to the real world.

Generating an endless list of true statements doesn't really do anything, those things are already true regardless of whether someone has written a lean program to model them.

Comment · 2 months ago
The entire point of writing proofs is for advancing human understanding. A giant dump of symbols that passes the lean compiler is meaningless besides human beings understanding it.
Comment · 2 months ago
Qwen 27B is runnable for that price and it can produce patches that work using opencode as a harness. It's obviously not as capable as frontier models but it can do things if you provide the judgement.
Comment · 3 months ago
How about we give humans access
Comment · 3 months ago
Have you not seen vend bench?
Comment · 3 months ago
I think the difference is in math the problem is fully specified and easily verifiable and in programming it's not. I don't agree that we always know we can solve the problem.
Comment · 3 months ago
But select statements are the most important part, and second to that is the fact that goroutines are low cost user space threads
Comment · 3 months ago
But it's not exactly a cosmetic change. x++ is semantically different from x; x++; I wonder if clang would make it branchless if you instead write

  if (BLQS_CMP(x, piv)) { *lwr = x; ++lwr; }
    else { *rwr = x; --rwr; }
The difference is post-increment has strange semantics. While the compiler should be able to understand that the value wasn't used and post increment and pre increment are the same I wouldn't be surprised if it tracks that it was post increment and misses some optimizations because it's trying to garuntee post increment semantics.

Although it's true compilers can be very sensitive to exact phrasing triggering specific optimization passes. So it still might not give the branchless version by changing it to pre increment (which is the same as a normal +=1).

The only way to really know is to dig into what optimization passes clang took in both cases and analyze the difference.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton