When I run an agent, I don't normally leave it running. I ask Cursor or Claude a question, it runs for a few minutes, and then I move on to the next session. Some of these topics, where agents are talking about what their human had asked them to do, appear to be running continually, and maybe grabbing context from disparate sessions with their users? Or are all these agents just free-running, hallucinating interactions with humans, and interacting only with each other through moltbook?

i need to firm my intuition on this first before i can say anything clever, but i agree it's worth thinking about!

probably my nomenclature bias is that i started this project as a way to find new preconditioners on deep nets.

If so, it would be nice if this were the case, because you could then just use the Woodbury formula to invert H. But I don't think such a decomposition exists. I tried to exhaustively search through all the decompositions of H that involved one dummy variable (of which the above is a special case) and I couldn't find one. I ended up having to introduce two dummy variables instead.

This is possible because the Hessian of a deep net has a matrix polynomial structure that factorizes nicely. The Hessian-inverse-product algorithm that takes advantage of this is similar to running backprop on a dual version of the deep net. It echoes an old idea of Pearlmutter's for computing Hessian-vector products.

Maybe this idea is useful as a preconditioner for stochastic gradient descent?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46638894

Points: 31

# Comments: 23

For example, your while-loops here

https://github.com/AGDNoob/axis-lang/blob/main/code_generato...

look like they might not be able to nest, since they assume the condition is always in eax and the loop doesn't push it down. So you'll need some kind of register allocation, which is a terrible pain in x86.

Also, I think it's worth coming up with an opinion about what other system programming languages are missing. And do the minimum work to provide that as a proof of concept, rather than trying to build a competitor to Zig right out of the gate. For example, maybe you have a perspective on a datastructure that should be a first class citizen, or maybe you've discovered the next best construct since async. Having that kind of vision might help focus the effort.

       # Parameter in Stack-Slots laden (für MVP: nur Register-Args)
        # Semantic Analyzer markiert Params mit is_param=True
        # Wir müssen jetzt die first 6 Args aus Registern laden
        # TODO: Implementiere Parameter-Handling
        # for now: Params bleiben in Registern (keine lokalen Vars mit gleichem Namen)

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32656757

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

Here's why I think you might be in an average team:

>"I have tried over the past 2 years to propose different solutions to hard problems and I just get blown off."

A good team has tough problems, and they need clever solutions. Maybe your team's mandate isn't to solve a tough problem.

>"product managers and “leadership” assign to our team with barely any input on the overall project or ability to propose new projects."

This sounds like you might be in a workhorse/executing engineering team.

You say this:

>"I’m scared to move teams ... because I have a good manager ... and my job isn’t that stressful."

A better manager would be trying to increase the team's scope, and yours. If you're not feeling some stress, your manager isn't growing you. A better manager would create a challenging environment for you where you'd feel like your ass is getting kicked.

There are great FAANG teams, and great FAANG managers. Seek them out! (I'm at Amazon, probably the "A" that didn't make it in your acronym. But if you drop me a note I could introduce you to great managers at Amazon)

I know I'm missing the point of the article so looking for helpful guidance.

It sounds like his game plan is to do “cto stuff”. But shouldn’t there be a more precise goal? Like picking some business metric and cause it to move in the right direction? Or define a new metric? Or introduce a fundamental new way for the company to do business? Once you know the specific problem you want to solve in the company, it becomes a lot easier to pick a strategy.

But maybe I’m just misunderstanding what the cto of a 30k person company does.