Problematic. Nearby city centre homes will be snatched up by those who have capital while others will have earn for 4-5 years to be in a position to buy
Exactly. If the problem is "Rich people and private equity are snatching up every home that gets built, as investments" then the solution cannot be "just build more homes." Those homes will just get snatched up by the same people.
It seems to me that MLA will become the standard from here on out.
If Deepseek R1 had used standard MHA, they would need 1749KB per token for KV cache storage. This means that once the conversation reaches ~46,000 tokens, the KV cache will have exceeded the entire storage capacity of a single H100.
Using MLA, each token now consumes 125KB. This means you can hit ~640,000 tokens (2x Ulysses) before overflowing.
Training and prefill are compute bound. Decode is memory bound. FlashAttention massively increases the arithmetic intensity of naive MHA, such that you can remain compute bound at lower batch sizes during decode.
It depends on the batch size and the accelerator you're running on! Decode is *typically* memory bound unless you can hit high batch sizes (in the hundreds), which is hard during serving due to the contention between batch size and low TTFT.
Everyone calling Loom a glorified screen recorder... there was a $975M dollar bill on the floor and no one else picked it up.
The technology was simple, but it solved a real problem for people. Solving well defined engineering tasks is vastly easier than solving a real problem.
Nobody said he wasn’t talented or hardworking, surely he is, extremely. It’s almost always a prerequisite for this sort of success.
But for every successful founder, there are thousands of founders who are more talented and more hardworking and ended up failing. There are so many factors at play and most of them are unknown or beyond your control.
What I’m saying is that this guy needs to learn humility and gratitude. This article reeks of Main Character Syndrome. Once he learns that his path to find happiness is going to be much easier (and I genuinely wish that for him).
"The Carbon Price Support (CPS), introduced by the UK Government in April 2013, has led to a substantial reduction in electricity generated from coal, which fell by 93% from a monthly average of 13.1 TWh in 2013 to only 0.97 TWh in 2019 (Ofgem, 2019a)."
They actually correctly priced the externalities and managed to decimate coal usage in the UK in a single decade. This increased prices accordingly.
This should be applauded, they correctly designed a scheme so that the economics aligned and coal was quickly removed. We can now focus on increasing energy production from other means and decreasing prices.
It’s a slowdown in tech recruitment, so it is fair for citizens to think for themselves first. There are quite a lot of candidates that can fulfill most of the roles, and it has bad optics when the government tries to prioritize others.
Disclaimer: I don’t live in the states, but I can understand the frustration.
Tech isn't a zero sum game, it's a growth market. If some H-1B talent helps grow a company faster, then they can increase their own citizen employee count faster.
That tracks only when it’s not taking 6+ months to find a stable job. It’s not really a growth market right now, and anyone who is on the hiring end/looking for a job can attest.
Doesn’t really matter. People won’t care about long term consequences if they’re experiencing hardships right now. It’s easy to say this when we have jobs, but if I didn’t have one, I would never want my government to prioritize others.
This is the bit that I've always found confusing. When it comes to blue collar jobs, people in the upper echelons will gladly advocate the wonders of millions of people entering the job market to compete with Americans.
But as soon as it's their own market that introduces additional competition, they will advocate "just pay people more, the job seekers exist, just not at the wages employers are offering, this extra competition only depresses American wages".
Which one is it? Is it "competition for other classes, no competition for my class please"?
Again, why is the answer in agriculture to simply not increase wages? Someone’s willing to pick berries for $100/h I’m sure. Does it make berries unsustainable as a business? Likely, but isn’t that an argument for moving away from industries that can only survive on exploitation of undocumented third world labor?
Ah, the argument is following it: the berries will still be picked in other countries for substantially lower wages and worse conditions than the wages or conditions (partially) of undocumented workers here. Even our worst jobs are substantially better (usually ~3x) than the average job of many countries, to say nothing about the huge gulf in security and institutions you get form living here.
That's also the argument that Bryan Caplan has been making for years in favor of open borders. I genuinely don't know what to make of it, I get the moral argument within it.
It's basic economics: wages are low because cheaper labor is available.
For instance, if working on an Alaskan fishing boat pays $2,000 a week, you might take the job despite harsh conditions. At $200 a week? Unlikely. But for someone from a less-developed country, $200 might feel like $2,000.
Remove the supply of lower-cost workers, and the resulting labor shortage drives wages up, seeking equilibrium in the market.
There were >100000 layoffs at tech companies in the last 4 years because companies “overhired”. The government is finally taking action to address a “labor shortage” in this sector, because these same companies cannot find anyone to hire? Something doesn’t add up here but a lot of people who have been given a pretty raw deal.
People don't like the fact that they actually need to be competitive in skills to get a job. Had there been no H-1Bs, they could submit a resume and immediately get a job offer!
No joke. I look around in my company, Indians and Chinese (among others) are good at their jobs and do amazing work.
Some people just don't like that. They blame not being able to get a good job offer on Indians taking away the opportunity, not themselves being good developers.
As an academic scientist in the USA, it is an amazing opportunity to work with bright people from all over the world. I feel lucky that I am from the place where this happens, and I don't personally have to travel overseas for it- but certainly would if I hadn't been from here. The scientists that come here from all over the world make discoveries that help everyone, but the companies that spin out of them usually end up US based and are a major driver of the economy. When we do hiring, it is only about 1/4 of the time or so I would say that we get a highly qualified applicant that is a US citizen.
Yes, people at Meta and Google are highly paid and highly skilled. Some more or less than others, in relation to the average, just like anywhere else. What is your example demonstrating?
>That says more about your company, and perhaps yourself, than anything else.
Why? You're simply sure the parent and the companies they work for are bad at hiring, or racist, or what? You've offered nothing but a spit in the face.
No, it means that if you find yourself surrounded by mediocre/incompetent people, it means that you aren't working at a good place and that you may be mediocre too.
It couldn't possibly be that the H1-B's that his company is hiring are bad, because his company is trying to save a buck by abusing the system, because that never happens.
You are not refuting what I said. The company is doing what it can do to maximize revenue and reduce costs. If you are working at such a company, that reflects on your skill more than anything else.
It's also missing the point. The verbiage around H1B is "to help employers who cannot otherwise obtain needed business skills and abilities", not artificially inflate competition for jobs. This issue was contentious even during the good times and I'm not surprised that it's flaring up during the bad times.
There are plenty of smart and excellent workers who come mainland China and India for sure but there are plenty of people who don't or come through the abuse of the program.
You have to first answer why few locals outside Stanford-Berkeley-MIT-CMU are hired out of school. Is it because all non-top-4 schools under prepare students? Is it before foreign workers are that much better? Or is it because companies are looking for underpaid workers they can abuse and keep in a state of limbo?
If CS degrees from non-top-4 schools are not valuable, best to get that out so US students are not studying useless degrees.
At the moment, at least in the trillion-dollar web companies, it seems not many people are being hired straight out of school at all. A new grad would have to really stand out to get hired in a field of experienced candidates. The potential cost savings of hiring a new grad doesn't seem to matter much to these companies.
In the past, I've seen a lot of new-grad hires from the top 30 or so schools, but not so many from the top 5. More likely Michigan, Maryland, or Washington than Stanford or MIT (I'm on the West Coast). Pandemic-era Stripe was an exception, they seemed to hire only top 5, but they were also offering outrageous pay at that time.
Someone graduating from a school not in the top 30 probably needs to adjust their expectations away from Google or Meta, at least for a first job, unless they have good connections and interview very well.
Back to your original point though, I think it's plausible that most schools not in the top 30 (charitably, top 50) are actually incapable of some combination of (1) attracting sufficiently smart and motivated students and (2) educating them adequately.
As person who is not currently trying to immigrate to the US I have mixed feelings. One one hand I wish all best to people who do want to move to the US, on other hand a non-broken H-1B could accelerate brain drain from the country I'm living in (which will be one more blow to already struggling economy).
I find it hard to believe you are surprised. In disagreement, sure. Surprised? This is an enormous, dramatic issue. People on both sides rightfully perceive it as borderline existential.
Really? You're surprised? You're surprised that a country and industry continuing to suffer from ongoing layoffs after layoffs, both stealth and honest, could possibly be negative about their government saying "yeah, let's bring in _more_ foreign workers while our own citizens can't find or keep their jobs"? The audacity!
Yeah. Do people really think that Silicon Valley would be such a huge economy (and a huge job creator for US citizens) if the US had never allowed immigrants to work there?
Founders of the original valley companies were US born (except Shockley) but by the early 70s many of the key participants were foreigners (Grove, Faggin, ...).
Yeah I would say very little about our current immigration situation resembles anything like 1970. So I’m not sure what the magic key to success is, that was alluded to other than “some people who were key were also not born in America”.
reply