1. Black cat crossing your path equals bad luck – they're just cats seeking food or shade.
2. Sweeping after sunset drives Lakshmi away – clean homes anytime; wealth follows effort, not timing.
3. Cutting nails or hair on certain days invites misfortune – hygiene has no calendar restrictions.
Celebrate the light of reason this Diwali.
Sarvam raised $389M to tell India it needs "sovereign AI."
Today they launched a decision model. We're an Indian team too, so we ran it head-to-head with Wity on JevBench.
lost 4-0 against wity Smarter, faster, cheaper, better calibrated.
Here's what $389M doesn't buy you.
Hot take: harness engineering is (usually) stupid.
Just use the one the model was trained for, and write really good behavior prompts to control how it works.
Lean into how the models want to work.
Hot take: harness engineering is (usually) stupid.
Just use the one the model was trained for, and write really good behavior prompts to control how it works.
Lean into how the models want to work.
I don’t think people realize how selfless and wonderful the StackOverflow’s founders were.
Unlike reddit, x etc they insisted ALL of their content will be 100% open, nothing will ever be locked up in walled garden.
They made it a point by even offering structured data downloads!
They didn’t cared people cloning the website. They didn’t worry about putting the whole monetization thing at risk.
It was a true hacker spirit in it’s purest form.
Most folks won’t be able to grasp how hard this is. You are on top of the world. Millions of people depend on you daily. You have the rarest opportunity to rack in billions. And you still stay true to your principles.
This exactly in turn later enabled AI revolution. I still remember downloading entire SO archives and preparing it for pre-training while Reddit and others went onto lawfare and firewalling the content. Note that this was the content their users - not reddit employees - had created for free and voluntarily to help others and the world. But they locked it all up for profiting from it personally.
SO did none of that. I think they knew they will be sacrificed at the altar. Yet it will exactly serve the intent of their founding principles to help others and the world, now through AI, even at bigger scale.
All of today’s models are built upon efforts of such true pure hackers who spent their days and years to create training data for AIs. I was a proud SO contributer for many years and there are couple of times while testing models I did felt that models might have used my answers 😇.
Hats off to @codinghorror and @spolsky and so many builders and hackers at SO for moving the world forward, one revolution at a time 🫡.
This solution is like removing ceiling fans to prevent suicides.
This would be so much inconvenience to passengers.
Who is approving such rubbish rules???
@vanshyadav1408 While i do understand the intent behind this tweet but the kids have their own life and should be able to make choices using their privileges.
The problem is jingoistic way of politicians and businessmen going hoola about staying in india
Many of you don't understand how serious this is, so let me break it down.
In computer science there is a famous kind of puzzle called 3-SAT. You are given a long list of yes-or-no switches and a set of rules about how they must be arranged, and you have to find a combination that satisfies every rule. The obvious way to solve it is to try every combination, but each new switch doubles the number of possibilities, so a puzzle with a few hundred switches would take longer than the age of the universe to brute force.
For decades, the smartest people in the field found clever tricks that made this a little faster, but every trick still hit the same wall: the time required kept exploding as the puzzle grew.
About 25 years ago, two computer scientists, Russell Impagliazzo and Ramamohan Paturi, working with Francis Zane, turned that wall into a formal idea.
They proposed the Exponential Time Hypothesis, which says this explosion is not a failure of human cleverness but a law of nature. No algorithm, however brilliant, will ever solve 3-SAT without the time blowing up exponentially. Nobody could prove it, but almost everyone believed it, and it became one of the foundations of modern computer science.
Researchers used it as a measuring stick. If you could show that solving some other problem quickly would also crack 3-SAT quickly, you had shown that problem was hopelessly hard too. Hundreds of papers, across scheduling, graphs, logic and much more, rest on this one assumption.
Now an internal AI model at OpenAI claims to have broken it. It says it found an algorithm that solves these puzzles meaningfully faster than the hypothesis allows, and it has checked the proof in a computer verification system called Lean.
And here is the remarkable part: the very people who proposed the hypothesis, Impagliazzo and Paturi, along with MIT's Ryan Williams, are now leading the public review of whether a machine has disproved their own idea.
So what happens next? If the disproof holds, a large part of theoretical computer science has to be revisited.
Every result that said "this problem cannot be solved faster, assuming ETH" loses its foundation, and researchers will have to work out which of those walls were real and which were simply where we stopped looking. It does not mean everything becomes easy. The new algorithm is still slow in absolute terms and this is not the famous P versus NP problem being solved.
But it means our map of what is possible was wrong in a place we were very confident about, and it was an AI that redrew it. If the disproof fails, the hypothesis survives and the field breathes out, but we will still have watched an AI produce serious, checkable work on one of the deepest questions in the discipline, closely enough that the founders of the idea had to take it seriously. Either way, something has shifted.
Story points in the agentic era:
1 point: Agents works for 6 hrs. I review the PR.
3 points: Agents works for 2 hrs. I make 4 decisions.
5 points: We need to figure out what we're actually building.
A murder convict's lawyer told the Allahabad High Court he wants to contest on a BJP ticket, and the Court stayed his conviction on that basis.
Not acquittal. Not bail on merits. Conviction stayed so a BJP aspirant can stay eligible.
This is what Rahul Gandhi meant. Not rhetoric. Not opposition drama. He said we are fighting the BJP, RSS, and the Indian State itself; and the Indian State just proved him right in writing.
When the judiciary uses electability as a shield against a life sentence, which institution exactly is still neutral?
A murder convict's lawyer told the Allahabad High Court he wants to contest on a BJP ticket, and the Court stayed his conviction on that basis.
Not acquittal. Not bail on merits. Conviction stayed so a BJP aspirant can stay eligible.
This is what Rahul Gandhi meant. Not rhetoric. Not opposition drama. He said we are fighting the BJP, RSS, and the Indian State itself; and the Indian State just proved him right in writing.
When the judiciary uses electability as a shield against a life sentence, which institution exactly is still neutral?
Visit any beach in india and you’ll see indians wandering around while the westerners are trying to relax at one place. We dont know when to stop, visit all the places to check off the list.
If you are accumulating wealth, a good wealth but think twice before ordering a 300₹ coffee and compare the taste with instant one, your wealth will be of no use. Only few will understand this.