I disagree. While yes they don't have all the architectural quirks of every GPU memorized, they are able to extract such optimizations from ISA docs and online guides. Now with 1M context available on frontier models, they can even fit the whole ISA definition in context (RDNA 3.5 here specifically) and spit out swathes of optimizations to try. The rest is just bruteforcing a single goal which they are extremely good at.

Or that's how simple it'll look until you have subtle bugs to solve somewhere deep in your stack.

Anyways, low-level hardware optimized GPU kernels has been an exceptionally good use case for agents in my opinion. They have far more trouble in other domains like doing GUI.

Once I got the manpages ready and the way I wanted, I just stored those in an empty project folder and told the agent to implement as specified in a language of my choosing.

Maybe for other development scenarios like GUI there is some "native" way to spec the project in a common format like this.

I guess my argument mainly is that people who take their luggage are not stupid, instead their behavior may be highly rational, however we have the means to change it with by making such choice irrational and I wish we will.

On international flights, an airline is liable for up to $1700 per the Montreal Convention. This might cover say half of one's laptop, which no matter how stupid it sounds, makes taking your luggage with you the only financially sensible choice in a crash (unless you have insurance). Now obviously such an event has other priorities than just financial ones, but it's no surprise if people choose to take their luggage with them.

On US domestic flights the amount is somewhat higher, $4700. However even this might not be enough for some. On EU domestic flights it's 1800€.

Airlines however are free to pay any amount they want, but they are not legally required to pay more than the limits set by law. So it is possible you will be reimbursed in full, but you wouldn't know that beforehand.

Of course the solution would be to make airlines liable to replace passengers' luggage in the event of a crash and inform the passengers that they will do so, but that's not how the world works currently.

Maybe if you're a huge org with a dedicated security team and so on, which could easily handle managing such service. I guess at a certain point it would bring cost savings at a scale in comparison to using Bitwarden, where it costs per team member or seat. Inhouse team has fixed costs in comparison.

Of course for smaller orgs or individuals there is little sense in hosting security software yourself. No way you're going to have enough time to manage the service and keep it secure, which is where almost all of such software's value is derived from.

This is why I think LLMs are more of a tool for the expert rather than for the novice.

They give more speedup the more experience one has on the subject in question. An experienced dev can usually spot bad advice with little effort, while a junior dev might believe almost any advice due to the lack of experience to question things. The same goes for asking the right questions.

It of course is problem of the consumer, as consumer is the one returning the item and the one who ultimately has to deal with a Chinese company that may not even speak English, not to mention the time the package takes to get there for a refund.

While it's the seller's responsibility in theory, yes, they make it very clear that you'll be dealing with a Chinese seller in their terms. Yes, it is your job to read the terms before you buy, however if you do read them, why wouldn't you just go buy from AliExpress after that? Absolutely no extra value buying from the dropshipper once identified.

In dropshipping the business won't have any foreign made inventory and neither will they have any in their country. Instead they will hook you up with a Chinese outlet without telling you.

The Chinese outlet will handle shipping, returns, etc with the dropshipping business just taking a cut for essentially spending money on Facebook Ads. This is the part where you'll deal with a Chinese outlet regardless of your preferences, because the dropshipping company basically did this to you without your knowledge.

They don't have a local stock to replace items under warranty. They don't have a local warehouse to return your item to if you're unsatisfied. They might've never even seen the product themselves and thus cannot even provide support regarding it's use.

So that's why I think it's important to point out dropshipping. It's a completely different thing than keeping a foreign-made inventory. There isn't really any good reason to buy from a dropshipper, because you'll deal with the Chinese outlet behind it regardless.

Read the terms and conditions, privacy policy and other more "obscure" information like that. Dropshipping items always ship from China and returns are received to a warehouse in China.

In their Terms of Sale, Sonic Brush mentions that it is rebranding the following product "We are selling the following brand mark : W-White.". So this would be the dropshipping product they buy from AliExpress.

However as you said, the toothbrush doesn't actually work.

These chips with 70s design are very common in ordinary "non computing" products, granted most are Chinese clones with varying levels of modification. I spend a lot of time reverse engineering regular commodity devices, their electronics and their firmware. For example the portable AC I just opened had 2 of these 8051s(?) inside, with an ESP32 for networking which I find rather fascinating. The first one controls physical inputs (buttons) and IR input from a remote, the second controls the AC compressor, fans and lower level electrical inputs (sensors etc) while taking input from the first and the ESP32 handles wireless communication sending input to the first one.

These old low performance chips are found inside mice, keyboards, remote controllers, dehumidifiers, air fryers and almost any other "simple" electronics. It's fascinating how a 70s chip design is still so prevalent in our everyday products.

I have seen more innovation happen in the CPU space in the last 5 years than the 20 years prior to that. This has been thanks to AMD, Apple, ARM, TSMC etc; Intel has seemingly attempted to only slow down the innovation to keep cozy at the top spot.

Personal example: I rented an AMD machine last month and I seriously thought there was a bug with fastfetch when it showed the CPU having 5,7GHz clocks with 32 threads. I didn't believe such was possible. I had to double check because it felt so far fetched seeing such monstrous increase in clocks and cores, when upgrading from a few years old Intel machine to a new AMD one. That's innovation.

However to Intel's credit they have made major innovations in other areas, like peripherals, interconnects and so on. I am extremely grateful for Thunderbolt/USB4 existing today compared to the myriad of vendor specific docking connectors of the past.

>How did this not happen at Intel after all these years?

They replaced engineers with accountants after gaining dominant position on the market. Short term it gave more profits but long term most innovation was lost in the process.

It's hard to overstate Intel's importance in regards to the modern CPU: they invented the microprocessor itself. (Though I'd like to state it's a bit controversial whether they only were the first to come up with a commercially available one or whether they actually invented the concept itself)

Also, there are many things outside the CPU that we take for granted today that were of Intel's innovation. A great example would be PCIe that Intel invented and essentially standardized. More recent example would be USB4.

Regarding CPUs they have some truly legendary chips, like the Intel 8086. This chip from the 70s is still in use today in your everyday products (as a clone though). It can be found TODAY in common products like computer mice, keyboards, AC, TV remotes and so on. Anything that is a commodity and needs some simple processing power has usually some derivative of 8086 inside it, granted ESP32 and such are taking over nowadays.

Of course the x86 instruction set comes from that very chip. I guess the name speaks for itself how big of a thing that was.

There's too much to fit inside one comment about how innovative Intel truly used to be, but they have a pretty good page for their history here: https://timeline.intel.com/

My experience on AI transcripts is different: I use auto (AI) generated captions on YouTube for every video and while there sure are some mistakes with especially names and specialized words, in general it is highly understandable. So much so that that I miss the auto generated captions when they're not available.

Even if real captions are available, on occasion I have to swap out from the human made captions to the auto generated AI captions, because believe it or not in some cases the AI generated captions are actually better with less mistakes! I find that rather impressive from the AIs side.

As an example for coffee consumption it could just be that coffee is consumed more in countries with higher living standards and higher living standards lead to longer life. Coffee might not necessarily be healthy by itself, though of course it could very well be.