vzcx

There is an open source silicon community built around multi-project wafer shuttles that has nothing to do with HFT.

Their bread and butter was, and as far as I know still is, trading in ETFs and ADRs. These things have a mechanism to create and redeem in exchange with underlying securities. This means one can make some money arbitraging differences between the bundle and components.

As this game got more competitive they seem to have branched out into other kinds of business including HFT.

Have you found LLMs to be good at metalinguistic abstraction? I have used them a little bit for lisp programming but never once have I seen them introduce macro.

Hardcaml compiles to verilog and then you use the horrendous vendor toolchains.

Nice solution and good easter egg find!

You can give the cell instances a stable name by setting GDS property 98, which I learned about from my reconnaissance of the puzzle author's github and sky130 visualization tool. This way I was able to spot check a pass over the netlist that broke up the regions into a hierarchical design.

I'd like to do a full writeup but haven't had the time.

This would need good image recognition, but maybe not so far out of the realm of possibility.

These GDS design files have a lot more structure to them.

Incredible amount of determination, but you really did make it hard for yourself!

You can install librelane to get the whole open silicon tool suite and the sky130 PDK. Circuit extraction can be done with magic. Going from a spice netlist to verilog netlist is pretty mechanical and not a hard transform to write. You almost immediately have something that can be simulated and a good baseline for further reversing.

LTCM was actually a lot more sophisticated, this fund's thesis was basically "number go up."

Count the OOMs!

As an American, I trust Chinese AI providers more than American.

I know your comment is about the absurdity of such a thing, and maybe the stupidity of the administration, but for the readers at home:

Fentanyl is actually a very simple molecule. The way it's (and other drugs) production is controlled is by controlling and monitoring the precursor chemicals. So if someone goes out and buys a lot of proprionyl chloride, they will pop up on the DEA's list.

This is a much more sane thing to do than hemming and hawing about how dangerous the AI chatbot is and placing yourself into a position superiority over your users, pretending you know better than them, assuming that you must protect them from certain knowledge for their own good, etc, etc.

> AI is dual use technology.

And? Computers are dual-use. Cars are dual-use. Telephones are dual-use. Freeze-dried chicken is dual-use.

Single-use, i.e. military only technology is actually pretty rare.

> This kind of posture is simply not tenable as frontier intelligence increases.

I reject the corpo speak that tries to brand these things as being "intelligent." They can be useful. But a language model cannot conjure a weapons platform from the ether no matter how "intelligent" it is.

Having a chatbot that talks to you about synthetic biology or nuclear physics is just not the same as being equipped to develop biological weapons or atomic bombs.

None of this will happen in the "neighbors backyard." You are exaggerating the threats to "democracy" while simultaneously invoking democracy to limit freedom of information. The suggestion that somehow the bad guys will get nukes if we let people access information is just absurd.

Society at large is not concerned about whether someone asks the chatbot about organic chemistry. They are concerned that they will be de-facto forced to interact with some shitty automated system to get by in life, like having to pass an AI-powered ATS to get a job.

They are tired of the hype and tired of idiots like Amodei being elevated to heights of power and influence. They are concerned that the things they love are being devalued. But they don't give a fuck if I ask an AI about genetically modifying viruses. This is a pet issue among some of the AI safety crowd.

So, yes, I am 100% fine with PRC-backed labs distilling Anthropic's models. I do not care about Anthropic. They have demonstrated that they are not on my side, and that they are at best ambivalent about actually empowering their users. I'm not a fan of the PRC either, but their distance makes them far less of a threat to me than companies like Anthropic and my own government.

Or... they just disagree with Anthropic's ethical stances and approach to applying them?