winwang
Joined 4 years ago
Karma
900
Submissions
473
Member since
Jun 17
Effective efficiency.
Building a hardware-accelerated (big) data platform.
View on Hacker NewsRecent submissions
Comment · 5 days ago
It's because the cache comes from the prefix. `f(f(f(A,B),C),D)` is quite different from `f(f(A,B),D)`.
Comment · 6 days ago
That may be a not-terrible idea (possibly even great idea), though it's not quite the base language I'm looking for. Maybe I need to just experience it more.
Comment · 6 days ago
I find that frontier AI is very good at understanding new syntax/semantics, for whatever reason. But that's moreso "why is it not just a huge waste immediately".
I want a new language because current GPU (and really, parallel programming) languages are just not it. Also, I think we'd be better off if it weren't just CUDA dominating the developer experience.
Moreover, I feel that we should be embracing advanced type systems with AI. The past couple decades have shown that people do want advanced typing even without AI. And now we have stuff like "Lean is faster than Rust" (https://kim-em.github.io/blog/2026-7-24-why-lean-is-faster-t...).
Programming is hard. Programming when you can't just rely on the classic RAM model is harder. Parallel programming at scale on vector processors with small amounts of cache (and slow cache at that) is even harder. We can do better. Rust has already shown this for normal systems programming.
Comment · 6 days ago
I disagree. There are things which are very annoying outside of core ideas or otherwise take a lot of time. Too much time and energy to justify normally. Personal example: https://github.com/wiwa/gpu-typing
Typechecking with my own algorithm. Simple enough to specify in Python. Annoying with much boilerplate in CUDA. Similarly annoying to test.
Comment · 6 days ago
I've been thinking about building a GPGPU language, but it's definitely going to take a while, even with AI. AI, unfortunately(??), cannot replace taste at the moment, and generally cannot unless it becomes a lot more disagreeable.
Taste is disagreeable.
Maybe Claude should not let me build a two-level type theory with just a "You're absolutely right!". In fact, now it will say "You're absolutely right, and it would be so amazing to use cubical types for blah blah", and adamantly defend it with several paragraphs of vomit.
Comment · 11 days ago
It's too good.
Comment · 17 days ago
Why would I assume it would be credible? Instead, I simply proposed some designs and had it find out if such hardware existed / was feasible.
Comment · 18 days ago
I remember chatting with about AI a few months ago about the issue of foreign RAM sticks being able to cooperate with websites to serve different files/instructions, undetectably. Scary stuff.
Comment · 18 days ago
Lol, this feels like it would otherwise be a good thing, out of context.
Comment · 18 days ago
It depends on what you're doing to the integers. You still cannot comparison-sort arbitrarily large integers in linear time.
Also, consider this: it would have been trivial to get a so-called "better bound" on FFT if such a "cheat" were what people allowed.
Comment · 18 days ago
The idea that FFT's decomposition is non-optimal is surprising. What the new bound means is we basically were looking at the problem and its structure incorrectly, and therefore implicates other problems for which we have used recursion to get to our currently-best bounds.
Almost no interesting math problems are just sitting there alone in their little corner. Getting a hint like that is a big deal.
Comment · 19 days ago
I find it highly ironic that many people here seem to believe mathematicians should just accept LLM proofs, but software projects shouldn't accept LLM code.
Comment · 20 days ago
Why would anybody need more than `268 435 456 ^ 62` KB of RAM?
Comment · 20 days ago
Also, the strong force is extremely repulsive at shorter distances.
The good news is that wikipedia has very good (and simple) figures for the shape of the force: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_force
Comment · 21 days ago
Good point, I think a better way to have said it would be something like: to almost everyone, there's some music or graphic which resonates with them emotionally, and this has been true for thousands of years. There are very few such admirers for code, which has also only existed for a few decades. Perhaps worse is that it is mainly a profession for even most programmers, and not something they automatically see as expression.