thornewolf

Joined 4 years ago

Karma
343
Submissions
162
Member since
Jul 7
thornewolf.com | poetry.thornewolf.com | contact (at) thornewolf (dot) com
View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 1 month ago
We have a bad universal classifier now (via Jev). 0->1, one might say.

A bad universal classifier does suggest a good one later. And that is exactly what I would call "theoretically doable"

That said, I don't think that Jev is a magic breakthrough or anything. I think it is just a particularly good narrative with an easy way to try it out.

Comment · 1 month ago
Write a prompt, evaluate the prompt, understand that is succeeds 95% of the time.

Write a new prompt, evaluate, it now succeeds 99% of the time. Measure what changes between prompt #1 and prompt #2, understand what contributed to the performance jump.

Write a third prompt, this one succeeds 100% of the time. Increase the size of your evaluation set, find a 1/5000 error-class and a 1/10000 error-class, add some explicit code to correct for this cases.

Roll out to production, collecting usage metrics. You make some tweaks to your harness, your prompts. Eventually you have confidence that your system has fewer mistakes than 1 in 100k.

Now, multiply this iteration across all your different prompts and different ways that they might interact with one another.

Comment · 1 month ago
without getting too far into it i would just like to note that i am in both these circles
Comment · 1 month ago
some initial function like

  v = setup()
  if v == 1:
    side_effect_1()
  elif v > 1:
    side_effect_1()
    side_effect_2(v)
  else:
    raise Exception()
then we can "refactor"

  v = setup()
  if v < 1:
    raise Exception()
  
  side_effect_1()
  if v > 1:
    side_effect_2(v)
i know that this might seem "dumb" that the code was ever setup the first way but code can grow into that shape pretty easily. this refactor "removes" the v==1 branch. this new code also follows the "early return" pattern, which improves readability.
Comment · 1 month ago
to add some context from "the other side": last year, i listened to 2930 distinct albums of which 50% were albums I had not listened to before. Even on a 30 year timeframe and a good discount factor for album repetition I don't think I can fit into the budget you propose without making significant concessions in my discovery process.
Comment · 3 months ago
My response is going to be about Gemini generally and less about NotebookLM.

Google's last frontier model release was Gemini 3.1 Pro, which was in February of this year[1]. At the time, it was ahead of the (at the time) flagship models of Opus 4.6 and GPT 5.2/5.3. From my recollection of the time, it was the best model in the world.

Anthropic released Opus 4.5 Nov '25, 4.6 in Feb '26, 4.7 in April, 4.8 in (late) May. Then Fable in June. 4.7 beat 3.1 Pro on multiple metrics. Fable eats it for breakfast. However, I want to note the 3 month gap between those first two Opus versions.

OpenAI released 5.2 Dec '25, 5.3 Codex Feb '26, 5.3 Instant Mar, 5.4 Mar, 5.5 (late) May, 5.6 July. 5.4 beats 3.1 Pro on agentic benchmarks[2], seems to be similar/losing on non-agentic. 5.5 seems stronger than 3.1 Pro[3].

Gemini 3.5 Pro is alleged to be launching within the week. Why do I type this all out? Because I think Google is getting a bad rap. They are delayed on a frontier release by a month or two and are being regarded as if they cannot release frontier models. I think their last release demonstrates strength and we need to see a weak release before we call them "behind" (in any reasonable sense). These companies swap back and forth constantly. I recall a multi-month span where 2.5 Pro was just the best thing out there by a large margin (in my opinion).

[1]: https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge...

[2]: https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-4-7

[3]: https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-4-8

Comment · 3 months ago
just read this when reviewing OpenAI's "spinning up" documentation as it was linked there!
Comment · 5 months ago
Comment · 5 months ago
not dead, they are on "luma". quality is higher in some ways, lower in some ways when compared to "old school" meetups
Comment · 5 months ago
I can't smell much at all. one time when i was 17 my friend told me i was kinda smelly (i had just exercised). I've been stressed about it since. the human brain can latch on to the oddest things
Comment · 5 months ago
there is something "wrong" with the ux that is hard to pin down. these things generate even text summaries more rapidly than i can read them. i need a better method for dumping info into my brain + dynamic control (if necessary)
Comment · 5 months ago
They have named themselves sqliteai and are releasing a library called adam. this is just advanced seo. seems neat though
Comment · 6 months ago
it's a security feature. otherwise my malicious site could check for cdn.sensitivephotoswebsite.com and blackmail you if it was cached already
Comment · 6 months ago
more ai articles on my front page :(
Comment · 7 months ago
I noticed this article is written by AI. Have you considered adding a disclosure?

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton