HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | respectattentio's commentslogin

This really feels like someone in 2000s saying: "One Month Without Internet"


This is so interesting.

I'm unlocking savings (in both speed and costs) but using a different way of thinking by integrating Decision models:

In short, LLMs spend so many turns on discovery, triage, and safety checks for everyday tasks. A decision model cuts those turns by preparing the relevant context before the prompt and handling the simple judgments itself, so the LLM only does the real work.

Here is the full article I published yesterday with in-house benchmark: https://tawfeks.github.io/decisionkit/

What do you think, guys? I need feedback on this.


I don't mean to be super negative, but I read through this all the way and still have no idea what it does or how it works. I think the problem statement needs to be outlined much better, and concrete examples of turns with/without your solution would be helpful to illustrate the difference.


Never heard of Bonsai before, but that looks great and promising for local on-device inference.

Yet, seems like there is still another year for improvements.

I like local models (but not mainly using them) for offline needs.


Great launch!

I was thinking about making a language with same thoughts: Safer than C++ and faster than rust (and a 3rd thing: optimized for AI)

and you actually did it for me. Hooray!

Just the AI language optimization thing is missing..


The AI optimization is to put it in distribution. So... make it look like python or js?


This is interesting and actually very important for robotics.

I've been waiting for this, but all companies seem to not care much now.

There is a way out of this by supplying right context (needs a bit of expertise in physics)

1 more year and frontier will become crazy good at this as well.


Seems like "some" of LLMs tasks are now Jev tasks.


I'm happy to not have used any of the two models to this date. A bit less intelligent models are doing great job for me.

But because of such news, sandboxes become way more important for safety (and doing more work due to running 24/7)


A few thoughts: I support AI acceleration to reach abundance and then and only then start regulating it, not before that.

Regulating early means just delaying abundance by 5 to 10 more years or maybe more.

I don't like to build something that will become useless due to AI after a few years. Let it advance to ASI (no need to release publicly) and then let everybody think about making it safe and aligned, then release.

I'm that simple.

What do you think?


How do you think that AI will create "abundance?" Are you thinking that it will somehow magically come up with solutions to climate change, war, corruption, the wealth gap, or any of the other ills that keep the majority of humanity scrambling to survive? Or do you just mean abundance for stockholders?


This hits hard.

I believe that because AI is learning human experiences, it will help with verifiable work.

Anything that can have outcomes or metrics well defined as true success criteria will enable AI to be able to help easier than other tasks (like writing). The easier the outcomes or metrics definition needed for success in a field, the better and faster we will see AI help in those fields.

The big example is coding.


Very little ‘magic’ seems necessary for those, rather a little less human-in-the-loop team sports with our future, and a little more feedback loop science.

Self-selected ignorance and scrambling seem both correlated and causative.

That said, SOTA machines can't run an office snack bar yet, so it'll be a minute before abundances other than caution.


Genuine question, because "abundance" is meaningless unless you qualify what you mean.

You're saying that we ask the ASI for "abundance" and everyone gets a mansion in silicon valley and doesn't need to work unless they want to? That doesn't seem like a realistic thing to be thinking about.


Interesting thought.

My view is that ASI could be created and benchmarked to know that it reached that level of intelligence.

Once we have that, we must sit to talk about abundance to define where to implement it and at what rate in full details.

It's like creating the magic tool to do anything, but we decide what to do with it.

But that is the ideal state that may seem far away, only time will tell how far it is.

I see it not that far due to this simple fact: AI is learning human experiences.

Note: this needs fully functioning robotics as well (software + hardware level intelligence).


What if under the no-pause scenario within a couple of years we get cures for N diseases each one of which affects tens or hundreds of millions of people every year - how many years would you wait and keep your hand on the pause button?


Couldn't we just break the pause button? so it is not usable?!

Not pausing means more people knowing truths of everything faster in this world.

One of them, that I'm very excited about, is science & research.


How much you want? $1M? $10M?

I could easily give you that title. Or maybe you can even do that yourself.

Lots of new companies are either faked, or amplified.

Example: If I made a sale of $100 this hour, it can become $864K ARR, with amplification (100 x 24 x 30 x 12).

What to do? Focus on your job and forget everybody else. Don't ever judge progress by revenue alone. A low revenue company who invents something in energy could be worth all companies exist today. But you never hear about it, because it is the real stuff.


Its fking frustrating and exhausting when you spend 8 months to build something genuinely good and not another AI wrapper and can't get money out of it and teach ai to survive. It sucks man


The right question:

Will 7G be needed?

I say no for the next 15 years. Because there are 1425235 other things that are way much important than this.


Right and society only works on one thing at a time


Yes, why working on something that "may" be beneficial in the far future? This is like inventing a 128-bit CPU architecture. Nobody would be able to utilize like even 1% of that, even with AI.


I'm not sure what performance improvements you're expecting with cell phone generations but most of it's pretty incremental. I don't think 7G is going to be even twice as fast as 5G on the same frequencies. It should be more stable, maybe millimeter wave will get deployed more, but it won't be wasted at all, lots of towers are going to be running at 100% utilization.


Research on 5G started ~2012 to be deployed since 2019 (7 years), research on 4G started maybe around 2000 for rollout in 2009 (9 years later). For 6G, research started around 2018 for an expected rollout around 2030 (12 years). These timelines are pretty typical in the telecom field.


The paper lists the "earliest plausible" deployment of 7G as 2039-40, so only 1-2 years off your estimate...


It may not be needed, but it will certainly be rolled out.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: