I don't think the safety record of a motorcycle is a standard to aim for -- but even then a kei truck is at least twice the weight and likely has significantly less sophisticated brakes.

[1] https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state...

One interesting property in benchmarking is that the distance comparison implementations for full-dim vectors can often be more efficient than those for PQ-compressed vectors (straight-line SIMD execution vs table lookups), so on some systems cluster-and-merge is relatively competitive in terms of build performance.

However, if the moderation approach is going to change, I think it would be better to do so explicitly through changes to the site guidelines rather than in an ad-hoc way. I don't think that this article is covering an 'interesting _new_ phenomenon' (emph. mine) as discussed in the guidelines, and indeed most of the comments are talking about moderation policy or the conflict in general as opposed to the details presented in the article. Perhaps it would be better to have a thread explicitly focused on members of the community engaging with each other as individuals, such as a hypothetical 'Ask HN: How has conflict personally affected you?' or 'Ask HN: How/why have your views on this conflict changed over time?'

The stories that the article has to tell are important, but they aren't the thing that people are discussing here. And moderating submissions instead of explicitly discussion-focused posts invites some of the concerns about sourcing and bias that have been raised in other comments.

This corporate structure is so convoluted that it's difficult to figure out what the actual powers/obligations of the individual agents involved are.

[1] https://openai.com/our-structure

Who knows, though -- I'm sure we'll find out more in the next few weeks, but it's fun to guess.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36005524

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

In general though PQ is a pretty good baseline. I'm glad all these vector DB companies seem to have decided that the best form of marketing is high-quality summaries/tutorials about fundamental concepts, it's a good contribution to the community.

[1] Fig. 1 in https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/mta/6/1/6_2/_pdf (2018)

But as the other comments have mostly said, it's mainly dimensionality and scale differences that drive the design differences (e.g. graphs end up working better than trees in high dimensions)

Shafi Goldwasser (Probabilistic encryption, zero-knowledge proofs, etc.) got her PhD in 1984.

Leslie Lamport is just a bit before your deadline, his 'Time, Clocks' paper came out in 1978, but the bulk of his work was after 1980, including paxos.

While there's definitely some truth to your Kuhnian view of 'times of revolution' in a field, I think it's hard to apply that to recent progress because it may just be that it's not clear which research works were groundbreaking without the benefit of hindsight. To me, the revolutionary period of CS research is still ongoing.

Google has a lot of user behavior signals to decide what should be in results 1-10. Deciding if a page should be ranked 20, 200, or 2000 without any user clicks to check if you're right is really difficult.

I would bet that since 2008/9, the relative numbers of spam site operators, Google engineers, second-page searches have changed significantly.

I'm not sure a good data source, but I'd expect that the serious injury rate per person-mile of buses is much lower than that of private cars.

On a sillier note, I wonder what the fastest speed you can reach is, in terms of timezones/hr.

My guess was a polar route like ANC-HEL, but there don't seem to be any direct passenger flights. Condor flies ANC-FRA seasonally, which is pretty much exactly 1 hour time difference per hour of flight. Another possibility is TAS->URC, at 1.2.

The author's routes, YVR-LHR and YVR-NRT, are both 0.8-0.9 hours difference per hour flight time, depending on direction.

P.S. Great work on your site, by the way - it's a really inspiring project!

edit: While I do think it's understandable, it's not great for transparency. Even if they don't want to open-source their index, I would admire it if they were willing to give ann-benchmarks[2] an API key to publish some independent results.

Disclaimer: I work on vector search at a different company

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210227105542/https://www.pinec... [2] https://github.com/erikbern/ann-benchmarks

From public info, you can see they have at least one researcher working there. It's believable to me that they could have some new innovations, especially since the product space they're focusing on is different from other teams working on vector search. State-of-the-art for a specific set of constraints is still state-of-the-art.

However, considering how much of their edu-marketing content is posted to HN, it would be great if they could share more details about the internals of their index with the community. One of the great things about vector search is how many techniques are open sourced or documented in papers :).

Disclaimer: I work on vector search at a different company

For your case, you might find it helpful to look at the excellent ann-benchmarks.com, and in particular the benchmarks for GIST, which is an image embedding.