The diagnosis I largely agree with. To the point I no longer identify as a (small-d) democrat, it is the tyrrany of the mob's choice of (usually reprehensible) representative, who will have lied and pacted with corrupt elites to obtain his/her position, and been nominally elected by the ignorant. Anyone who wants power should by that fact be excluded. The solution however (lottery-election) is absurd. We should instead restrict the franchise by exam to provably non-ignorant, non-evil critical thinkers so that we get representatives who are non-sociopaths that we can respect.
> We should instead restrict the franchise by exam to provably non-ignorant, non-evil critical thinkers so that we get representatives who are non-sociopaths that we can respect.
How do we prove non-evil?
Also the exam part brings to mind the Chinese imperial exams for civil service.
I don't know whether that's good or bad, it didn't work out well for them.
For a critical thinking exam, you should be able to show that you can decipher political gobledegook, identify lies and platitiudes, strawman arguments etc(there would be much less of it anyway as in a restricted franchise very few with votes would be swayed by it, which is the point.)
Non-evilness would be shown by answering questions designed to test basic empathy, and also by the lack of recent recorded crimes or misdemenours.
Apriel-H1-15b-Thinker-SFT uses incremental distillation from Apriel-Nemotron-15B-Thinker, selectively replacing less critical attention layers with linear Mamba blocks to reduce computational complexity while preserving reasoning quality.
That's exactly the point (ie just prior to distribution) where a simple sanity check should have been run and the config replacement/update pipeline stopped on failure. When they introduced the 200 entry limit memory optimised feature loader it should have been a no-brainer to insert that sanity check in the config production pipeline.
Come come now. Elon has built Tesla on something closer to $38bn of taxpayer largesse/avoidance according to the Washington Post.0 I doubt many people would fail to create public entities with healthy casino ponzi stock trading if they had umpteen billion $ of govt funny money propping them up. Hell they might even start a rocket business as a sideline...
MS could always refocus themselves as a global company (in the legal rather than marketing-only sense), and move their HQ out of the US, then there could be no Trump tantrums affecting other countries, the worse that could happen would be some sanctions on what would then be their in-country US affiliate, with no ability to affect their other global operations whatsoever. Why haven't they followed this approach? Haven't lost enough customers yet?
MS lives by corporate contracts and there are a lot of very powerful US companies that will roll over if Trump barks - if MS had already fled the US in a legal sense they'd definitely be in a better place but trying to leave during this administration would cause Trump's ire to focus on them and likely cost them an immense amount of money. I don't particularly like MS and both office and windows are declining in quality quickly so I wouldn't be opposed to the move but... nothing would sink that ship faster than losing a bunch of large US contracts as Trump toadies demonstrate their loyalty by bravely switching to alternatives.
Its pretty decent. Decent enough in fact that I can run a Windows 11 ARM install on vmware Fusion on my macbook m4 pro, and it will happily run win arm and x86 binaries (via builtin MS x86 emulation) decently fast and without complaint (we're talking apps, gaming I haven't tried.)
I decided a Macbook pro M4 pro was the right option for me, 48gb/36 accessible to the gpus with very decent tokens/s throughput for (increasingly impressive) offline midrange open LLM inference and huge battery life. Nothing in the windows world to touch it. But a few windows-only bits of software I occasionally use now run very happily in a Windows 11 arm vm on a free VMware fusion 25H2 on my mac, with a 5 dollar win oem license.
> It looks like a process model; isolation between programs with a system for inter-process communication, and running within a single process's memory.
Which is better handled by existing mature and simpler abstractions from the actor model, like Akka.net, or maybe Orleans.
For sure, but the author also proposed "unmanaged spaces" which would run in-process but with no GC. This seems to be the main goal and everything else is definitely better handled with existing solutions.
It does but the GC can still stop-the-world pause threads that aren't touching GC memory. The author's proposed isolation would provide a way to avoid that.
I wanted to reply to you directly. I was truly impressed by your comments. You understood the precise, deep technical problem I was aiming at—the GC's 'stop-the-world' pauses affecting even non-GC threads—even from my admittedly clumsy and brief initial post. Thank you for that.
What I failed to convey properly, however, is that this performance mechanism is just one small consequence of a much larger idea. It's a foundational piece of a complete architectural model I've designed to address the fundamental pains of the current microservice paradigm.
I have now finished a full manifesto that lays out this entire vision. It includes a deep critique of our current ecosystem and presents the philosophy for a new style of programming intended to solve these core issues.
Given the depth of your understanding from that first article, I would be genuinely honored to get your critical feedback on the full proposal. If you're interested, the new post and discussion are here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45477324
Thanks again for your incredibly insightful comments.
I'm divided, a lot of people internally and from suppliers depend on them for work. Equally they are majority owned by an indian company (Tata) now that also mandated they use their useless in-group IT outsourcer whose secrity appears to be pretty lax. In the end I'd say the govt should make the condition for a loan that they dilute out much of the equity holders / share out the loss - in order for them to step in and prevent a total loss, and so the taxpayer gets some longer term contingent benefit.
The Landrover side is clearly doing work, even if the Jaguar part was doing poorly before this. There are a lot of suppliers also that end up having to furlough if their main client shuts down. And there are second order effects on local economies when that happens, and therefore on HMRC. And you also don't want to lose engineering skills that might be needed for e.g. military crossgrades/upscales. Ultimately its better to have that continue than not, but I also believe the consequences should be significant on the mismanaging equity holders, esp. Tata, and potentially beneficial for taxpayers longer term, which reduces the moral hazard aspect for a better overall solution.
reply