After reading the reddit comments, it looks like a primary problem is that the author doesn't (didn't?) understand how to benchmark it correctly. Like comparing the time to mmap() a file with the time to actually read the same file. Not at all the same thing.
I mean, its open source so people can create benchmark and independently verify if the AI was wrong and then have the claims be passed to the author.
I haven't read the reddit thread or anything but If the author coded it by hand or is passionate about this project, he will probably understand what we are talking about.
But I don't believe its such a big deal to have a benchmark be written by AI though? no?
> I mean, its open source so people can create benchmark and independently verify if the AI was wrong and then have the claims be passed to the author.
Thank you for volunteering. I look forward to your results.
> Thank you for volunteering. I look forward to your results.
Sure can you wait a few weeks tho? I know nothing about benchmarking so gonna learn it first and I have a few tests to prepare for irl.
I do feel like someone else more passionate about the project should try to pick the benchmarking though.
I don't mind benchmarking it but I only know tools like hyper for benchmarks & I have played with my fair share of zip archives and their random access retrieval but I feel like even that would depend from source to source.
There are some experienced people in here who are really cool at what they do, I just wanted to say that if someone's interested and already has the Domain Specific knowledge to benchmark & they enjoy it in the first place, this having AI benchmark shouldn't be much of a problem in comparison.
Why would someone spend their time checking someone else's AI slop when that person couldn't even be bothered to write the basic checks that prove their project was worthwhile?
Yeah, just following up to my grandparent comment to say "wow. Holy shit. It is how it looks." I'm not sure why I was surprised; maybe I'm an optimist, or as I suggested in my first comment, a bit naive.
In my defense, I don't think I'm stupid; I just don't want to believe so many people in power are cartoonishly evil, so I tend to look for explanations that don't require it. I think my internal sense of the world wants there to be a distinction between, say, average cryptoscammer evil buffoonery and the people in positions where at least ostensibly they try to present as a good guy while trying to keep their evildoings secret. This story gives me some sort of cognitive dissonance, and while reflecting on that fact, I get a bit sad. This world is bonkers.
The food pyramid also seemed like pretty reasonable dietary advice until it wasn't. The skepticism expressed by other posters about where the guidelines originated from is well founded.
> tells people to eat the food of another mammal's baby. This is the opposite of "reasonable" - it is actual government propaganda to support lobbied industry.
Oh, I was wondering where the part of your screed was gonna come out as crazy. Human consumption of dairy is thousands of years old.
Many (most?) human behaviors are thousands of years old, it does not make them reasonable. Also, refrain from hurling insults; just do not respond if you cannot materially substantiate your argument.
The same argument gets used when concerning CPU performance when writing software with 10+ levels of abstraction and now your CPU gets pegged when on a semi-active Discord channel.
Who cares that it takes a million clock cycles to process a single message? People are running 5 Ghz CPUs, so that's only 200 ms, right?
To be fair, they started working on the game before it was discontinued. I'm sure someone made a decision that it made more sense to continue on without support rather than start from scratch.
Indeed. And pharmaceutical companies will never do studies for medicines they cannot patent. And you can't patent natural medicines, only synthetic. So only the synthetic ones that are created by them are being studied and are the only "proven" medicine.
Convenient not?
Maybe we should have an independent institute backed by citizens, that does these studies, for both natural and synthetic medicines.
But that would destroy the pharmaceutical industry.
reply