I think Dario is trying to raise a new round because OpenAI has done and will continue to do so, nevertheless, the essay provides for some really great reading and even if the fraction comes true, it'll be wonderful.
So it's bs but for money and therefore totally fine ? I think it's not ok if only a fraction comes true because some people believe in those things and act on those beliefs right now.
I didn't say it was bs. I was alluding to the timing of this essay being published but, clearly, I didn't articulate it in my message well. I also don't think everything he says is bs. Some of it I find a bit naive -- but maybe that's ok -- some other things seem a bit like sci-fi, but who are we to say this is impossible? I'm optimistic but also learnt in life that things improve, sometimes drastically given the right ingredients.
It took us almost 2 decades but finally the truly cloud native architectures are becoming a reality. Warp and Turbopuffer are some of the many other examples
Curious what your definition of cloud native is and why you think this is a new innovation. Storing your state in a bunch of files on a shared disk is a tale as old as time.
Not having to worry about the size of the disk for one. So much time in on that premise systems was about managing quotas for systems and users alongside the physical capacity.
This reminded me of my Hopfield networks implementation in Go [1]. The algorithm is rather simple but fascinating nevertheless and works surprisingly well for reconstructing noisy images. I actually blogged about it as well [2]. But as many are discussing here Deep Memory networks based on Boltzmann networks are more powerful yet they don't seem to have found much use case either
I finally read it recently (few months back or so) and I thoroughly enjoyed it. One of the many takeaways for me was how similar the SW world is to the HW one when it comes to actual human being behind engineering -- I guess I shouldn't be surprised but for some reason, the book reinforced that notion in my head. I'm sure I will read it again at some point.
I used to be a big user of dark mode on every site that hd it available. Nowadays I just turn it off. I find it incredibly annoying and I’ve also realised that my eyes don’t hurt as much as I’ve read abou they should. I suppose YMMV
I use it at night on my phone and desktops. With dark reader to switch it. During the day I use normal mode. It really helps at night because displays these days can't get too dark anymore. They're optimised for peak brightness because high values sell betterbut low brightness gets neglected.
My 24" 4K display i use during the day with 0% brightness. Obviously at night this is too bright so i have to reduce the contrast which really hurts colour depth. Dark mode helps a lot then.
It's funny, at first I just thought it was me. But I took my old VT520 one time and I was really surprised how darkly it can paint a perfect screen. Even in a dark room I can set it so low I can barely read it.
I have been surprised recently how many competing companies YC have founded recently. I know VCs do this all the time but I still find it a bit strange - not sure how I would’ve felt if the same fund backed my competitor. That said, YC have always said that they were backing founders not ideas so …
I don’t thinks its the worst, but it did feel in bad taste. YC have put money and trust in them, so why would they kick them down? Would you? They haven’t committed any crime so why would they distance themselves (Note: I am not a YC founder or affiliated with YC in any way)
There's a question in a (reasonably) dead reply that I want to resurrect:
> Are we to go out and memorize everyone’s personal framework/religion (cause I can tell I’m not going to) or do you have something else in mind except a dead end question that goes nowhere?
No, what I expect is for people to have thought about their own personal framework.
That said, it's worth at least understanding a bit about other people's frameworks, because a) people have been thinking and writing about these topics for thousands of years, and you just might learn something. And b) you are living in a world with other people, people who are not dummies. If your own moral code is, say, "grab the cash and run", there going to treat you differently.
That's part of why most professional organizations will have codes of ethics. E.g., IEEE has a good one for themselves [1] and another one specifically for software engineers. [2] It's true even in areas where making money is the primary goal, like business and finance.
Take the current article as an example. The PearAI founders have revealed something about their moral code. That will matter down the road. E.g., Whenever I'm hiring somebody I'll look at their resume and flag companies with known ethical problems. Maybe that gets them binned, maybe I ask them about it. And when I've founded something, the ethics of my cofounders has been among my highest criteria. That's true for a lot of founders and execs I know.
They haven't built anything and didn't even bother to properly rename everything in the original repository.
It's clear they are not deserving of YC backing, nor are they trustworthy, as they seem to have misrepresented their involvement in building the software. They're not in crypto anymore :)
> They haven’t committed any crime so why would they distance themselves
There are bad, socially unacceptable things that are also not crimes (for instance: lying in a lot of contexts). Crimes (for the most part) are just the more extreme bad things someone can do.
If you think the bar for distancing from someone is "committing a crime," your bar is far too low. Unfortunately, that minimal bar is a meme that has been pushed with some success by people who want to get away with shady shit.
EDIT: Looks like they have since changed the license to Apache 2.0 but it's still in violation of the original MIT license and does not contain the required copyright notice.
It'd be unethical for YC to kick them out. PearAI signed an agreement with the startup incubator and presumably didn't misrepresent their product. The main criticism is that YC made a bad business decision by backing a non-innovative product. That's an issue that should be handled privately between YC and the founders, not through public humiliation.
If I get hired at a job I expect my boss to (publicly) back me if another team criticizes my work, then tell me the issues in a 1-on-1. If I have investors I expect them to (publicly) back my business strategy and privately tell me their concerns.
I don’t know enough to say they’ll fail or be successful but I am wondering who will underwrite this IPO — they must have balls of steal and confidence gallore
