> Unlike conventional large language models prone to hallucination, these new systems leverage dynamic multi-method generation (DMG),

The only search results for this term are this article and promotional things for this company getting funded (Xavier)

Let me guess, it involves giving a bunch of different LLMs the same inputs, and picking the best output?

Probably they feed the outputs into another LLM.

Quick, patent it, save the prompt, that's golden IP right there.

The overuse of emojis in the comments makes this whole thing feel a bit off to me. Like someone faking interactions and trying too hard to make them look convincing

Forums with lots of women often use more emojis, its just how it is.

They address this and state that there is no reason to believe it wouldn’t also apply to the general population who do not have lipohypertrophy

However they have no evidence of this. While I would expect this to be the case (as a researcher of ageing epigenetics), this is entirely conjecture.

> It is rare to read something more moronic than that

It's not actually wrong though is it - real codebases have been implementing reflection and introspection through macro magic etc. for decades at this point.

I guess it's cool they want to fix it in the language, but as always, the approach is to make the language even more complex than it already is - e.g. two new operators (!) in the linked article

> been implementing reflection and introspection through macro magic etc. for decades at this point.

Having a flaky pile of junk as an alternative is never been an excuse to not fix the problem properly.

Every proper modern language (Rust, Kotlin, Zig, Swift, even freaking Golang) has a form of runtime reflection or static introspection.

Only C++ does not. It was done historically with a mess of macros or a pre-compiler (qt-moc) that all have an entire pile of issue.

> the approach is to make the language even more complex than it already is - e.g. two new operators

The problem of rampant complexity in C++ is not so much about the new features when they bring something and make sense.

It is about its inability to remove the old stuff even if it is consensual that it is garbage (e.g iostreams).

> Having a flaky pile of junk as an alternative is never been an excuse to not fix the problem properly.

Thank you. Some people use the phrases "real projects" and "production code" as if they imply some standard of high quality.

> but this did allow for a port of the game to the OG XBOX (733 MHz PentiumⅢ box) way back in 2003

Not sure if the clock speed is just for reference or emphasis re: efficiency, but RCT1 will in fact happily run on a Pentium 90 (which is still mind blowing to me given the scope of the game)

Just for disambiguation to emphasize that I'm talking about the Intel-based console, because the naming scheme of the later Microsoft consoles makes it easy to confuse “Xbox One” with the OG one. I spent most of my time playing RCT 1 and 2 on a 400 MHz PⅡ, and their performance was indeed flawless :)

Having cut my teeth writing asm on 386/486 in ms-dos, these comments are kind of hilarious to me because Pentium is well into "you can write most of it in C" territory.

By the P2 era (97-98), especially as consoles show up, assembly's not desirable at all.

Pmode/w was released in 97 which speaks to the demand for a Watcom C/C++ protected mode extender at the time...

I don’t think necessity has anything to do with it being written in assembly in the first place, it’s just Sawyer’s background was in porting others’ titles and it was just what he was used to using

> his lease said that he wasn't allowed to receive mail at the house he was legally renting.

Pretty sure that is not a stipulation you can legally put in a tenancy contract. Because both parties have to be able to serve notice on the other via post in writing. Same reason you are legally entitled to know the postal address of the landlord.

I'm sure you are right, but that didn't stop the landlord from trying their luck. Your observation about serving notice is on point, because in the end the deposit was returned only after my friend filed a small claims case against them.

The linked story is “YC says YC companies growing faster because of AI”

The story doesn’t state much about source but is it literally just an editorialised press release?

Here's an exact source: https://www.vanta.com/resources/why-the-next-unicorns-are-bu...

I'm leaving that utm_source in the link for irony, lol. Couldn't find it from the first page of Google, but AI found it in seconds.

And AI found the wrong source in seconds, because this is dated in May and the original article you linked is from March.

Don't worry, I'm sure he'll say the same thing again in September, which will invalidate both of these sources.

Garry Tan almost certainly has incentives to promote this tech.

That doesn't make him wrong though.

It ticks the boxes for bad science. I was hoping someone would call out Garry's statement as an anecdote as well rather than debating whether he said it.

But I doubt there will be proper data either way. Whatever model is used in research will be deprecated by the time something is peer reviewed. If a model hallucinates, can't do X, is boring, has so and so security holes, the report is out of date by the time it's released.

But the next best we have is that people who make these claims are throwing money at it. I would be highly suspicious if people made these claims and then didn't double down on their investments. Sundar says AI is bigger than fire which is highly sus, but the way he's been reorganizing one of the world's most stable companies to focus totally on AI suggests that he believes it.

> I found it. All that tells you is that it's a simple problem

Not totally clear what you mean here - are you saying you’re the author of the article or PR, or that you independently discovered the same issue (after the fact)?

Ok, so somehow that is causing confusion. I will clarify.

The author asked that the reader attempt to find the flaw by inspecting the provided code. The flaw was obvious enough that I was able to find it. The implication is that if it were less obvious, I might not have. I was not attempting to take any credit at all: exactly the opposite.

The impression I got from Wikipedia reading about this (suzetrigine) is that it’s not addictive because it acts on peripheral nerves and not directly in your brain

Given how scared people are of "addiction" the seller certainly would like that narrative and it might make sense from a withdrawal perspective. Which in turn has an effect on how addictive a drug is to a very large degree.

This is a really cool project thank you for sharing.

I'm prototyping my own similar kind of thing right now - an enclosure for growing culinary mushrooms - so seeing how you've used and attached the humidifier discs is really useful inspiration.

On humidification - have you considered decontamination for the water? I think bacteria and scum build up is an issue, and I've seen heavy duty equipment incorporate e.g. a submerged UVC light for trying to keep it clean. I wonder whether it's possible to do similar on a small scale by using a UVC LED (obviously need to be careful with safety though)

Thanks!

Sounds like a fun project, best of luck! Would love to see what you come up with. One word of warning with the misting: using them in an "upside down" configuration as I'm doing can be a bit finicky. I've encountered some that slowly drip due to the pressure of the water above them. Look for misting discs with small hole sizes (<=4uM) and expect that some percent of them won't work well. However, the ones that do drip at the start typically stop after a day or two of use and are fine from there on out.

I have not really considered decontamination and I don't think it's much of an issue for terrariums because the plants and soil in the enclosure already contain a lot of bacteria, etc. I could see it being much more important for your use case with mushrooms where a small number of mold spores can ruin an entire mushroom grow.