JAX seems well engineered. One would argue so was TensorFlow. But ideas behind JAX were built outside Google (autograd) so it has struck right balance with being close to idiomatic Python / Numpy.

PyTorch is where the tailwinds are, though. It is a wildly successful project which has acquired ton of code over the years. So it is little harder to figure out how something works (say torch-compile) from first principles.

The benchmarks are here: https://github.com/maximhq/bifrost/blob/main/docs/benchmarks...

Some features: • Built-in governance and routing rules • Supports over 1,000 models from different providers • MCP gateway included (HTTP, SSE, and console transport) • Out-of-the-box observability and OTel-compatible metrics

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44820784

Points: 8

# Comments: 1

On the other hand, I think MSFT was trying to pull a classic MSFT on AI. They thought they can piggyback on top of OpenAI's hard-work and profit massively from it and are now having second thoughts, thats better too. MSFT has mostly launched meh products on top of AI.

Hope you get some nice time off and go back with vigour to Turing's Dream now...

[0] : https://cognitivemedium.com/srs-mathematics

Job seekers currently in college have no idea what is about to hit them in 3-5 years.

Take CS 231, for example, which stands as one of Stanford's most popular AI/ML courses. Think about the number of students who have taken this class from around 2015 to 2017 and have since advanced in AI. It's fair to say a good chunk of credit goes back to that course.

Instructors who break it down, showing you how straightforward it can be, guiding you through each step, are invaluable. They play a crucial role in lowering the entry barriers into the field. In the long haul, it's these newcomers, brought into AI by resources like those created by Karpathy, who will drive some of the most significant breakthroughs. For instance, his "Hacker's Guide to Neural Networks," now almost a decade old, provided me with one of the clearest 'aha' moments in understanding back-propagation.

Looking back on my life I think we asians have definitely stretched this way too far. Unfortunately, in high & young population countries like ours these exams are perceived as the only non corrupt way of moving out of low income trap. So this will go on :-(

Some criticism of CEO might be warranted. But remember that CEO compensations tied to profit after tax. I guess the only way to get back old Google is to start one!

Once number of employees hits a certain inflection point (roughly when one can't identify everyone with name), the focus for a lot of people is to keep their manager happy. Because any other goal is too abstract. Safi Bahcall's book Loonshots had some nice discussions on this point.

Do things work differently in America?

I was amused to learn that there are societies dedicated to the cause of dozenal system who write papers and books urging everyone to switch. On the other hand, I don't know if it is exaggerated but French revolutionist had grand ideas of creating decimal based systems even for time. But better sense prevailed in the long run!

It is interesting to think how can changes of the form "if we can align everyone to change and adopt this new way" can be brought about at any scale beyond a few thousand folks. I think large mass adopted switches (horses to cars, smart phones) have been about incentives and convenience demonstrated by some early adopters. But for basic arithmetic this seems impossible to pull off!

The next question is why bother? What's the point? Turns out that important real life signals, like AC voltage and current, are sinusoidal. And real life electrical machines shift the phase of these signals. By using complex numbers to represent these signals, you can continue to use simple maths of DC circuits to analyze AC circuits. So you'd can still use V = IR, but R of a AC machine like motor will be impedance (generally called Z), represented by a complex number.

I found first few pages of MD Alder's complex analysis for Engineers indispensable in demystifying this complex stuff. Here's a quote from first paragraph "If Complex Numbers had been invented thirty years ago instead of over three hundred, they wouldn't have been called `Complex Numbers' at all. They'd have been called `Planar Numbers', or `Two-dimensional Numbers' or something similar, and there would have been none of this nonsense about `imaginary' numbers"

More details on the link here: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/gemini-xii-crew-masters-the-cha...