Everyone's trying to make CPUs faster.
I’m trying to make them worse.
New project: CPU deoptimization.
Searching for the slowest possible machine instructions
x86 single instruction record:
198,002,498,236 cycles, 62 seconds
The assembly hall of shame: https://t.co/G4QnFQjsZx
We need to write and read ourselves and make our own organic content now more than ever before. Even if it's not great, even if it's just your tiny domain expertise, it will stand out and people will want the human touch.
Alright interns, we need to have some real talk here
I am tired of vibing on stream. I dont really like vibe coding unless its a tool i have no desire to build (how i manage things on my stream / how i write my youtube videos are great examples of things i would never build but i have). I dont like vibing the things i care about. I hate the code it generates, i hate the feeling of getting everything i ask for and nothing i want. I hate the subtle offness around vibe coded things. It is just driving me nuts. So for the next while i am going to be done vibing on stream.
I genuinely have been trying my hardest to make this work and i cannot quite put a finger on why i hate it, but i do. And i just feel so horribly guilty and wrong because i am not getting the results of "everyone else on twitter."
How am i, someone who prides themselves on making youtube videos that i think are actually good for people. To make videos that help people laugh at the silliness of tech or learn something new. But here i am not able to keep up with all these people claiming the sky is literally coming down. I just feel horrible and guilty about it.
Now i know the world is changing fast, and i want to be able to understand that change super well, be able to talk about it, be able to give really accurate opinions about it so for the last 3 months i have vibe coded an absurd amount of things. But now... i am just tired of it.
I dont want this any more. I want to be a tradcoder.
I dont know why i told everyone this, but i just have this growing sickness that is just eating me alive around vibing and i dont know how to express it.
You all are fired,
CEO ThePrimeagen
C’est totalement faux. Friend. com a accès à toutes les données des utilisateurs. Dans leurs termes et conditions, ils expliquent même que ces données sont utilisées pour entraîner leurs modèles d’IA.
Cher journaliste, quand vous interrogez des personnes tech sur de la tech, n’oubliez pas de bien préparer votre sujet et surtout d’avoir de l’esprit critique face à ce que vous voyez et face à ce qu’on vous raconte.
Sinon, une vidéo informative sans contradiction se transforme rapidement en vidéo promotionnelle détournée, où vous laissez des Américains vous dérouler leur marketing.
Il y a beaucoup de hype et de bullshit autour de l’IA. Ne travestissez pas une information pour en faire une news « hype », surtout face à des fondateurs qui peuvent vous raconter n’importe quoi, sachant que vous ne les contredirez pas.
Ici il aurait fallu l’interrompre juste au « like crypto » 😂.
If Dark was an anime, the finale would be remembered as one of the greatest of all time.
People don’t talk enough about why Dark actually works where most time-travel stories collapse.
• Time travel rules are clearly defined in Season 1 and never broken
• Every loop is causal, closed, and paid off — no hand-waving, no retcons
• Deaths are permanent, brutal, and often the cause of future tragedies
• Side characters aren’t filler — every bloodline matters to the endgame
• The finale resolves all three worlds, all paradoxes, and the origin point
• No sequel bait
Unlike Stranger Things, where post-season interviews are doing damage control, Dark lets the story speak for itself.🐐
48h que des milliers de femmes et enfants se font dénudées par des gros porcs avec Grok sans que rien ne se passe ici, le minimum devrait être une suspension de l'accès à Twitter en France jusqu'à régulation hein la situation est grave on parle de protéger les gens là
AI issues aside, the only way you could ever write something like this is if you've never experienced real creativity yourself. Creativity is not about the amount of output you generate per unit time, and anyone engaged in a truely creative (not derivative) endeavor knows that.
And to be more specific, a person who loves to paint should not "love" a technology that paints for them. The only person who would love that is someone who only cares about having the finished painting, which is by definition not someone who loves the act of creation.
People will pay hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars per year on video games, movies, subscription services, daily $10 “coffee”, alcohol, drugs, and then turn around and be “outraged” at $40 for an extremely well crafted piece of software by an indie developer
At long last, Version 6 of m'y #Vegeto vs #Gogeta animation is here‼️
The next update will probably be the last one i think.
I know many waited for it, very sorry for the wait.
I do this on my free time when i have some lol, or when i have the motivation to do it (Some of the new cuts were very annoying to do lol).
This time, this is with "Kiseki No Honô Yo Moeagare!!".
Small reminder, This is just for fun. i'm not a professional animator.
Sorry for the watermarks, but i had to protect it a bit.
Stay tuned for the next update ! #DragonBall #DB1_ART
I am the main developer fixing security issues in FFmpeg. I have fixed over 2700 google oss fuzz issues. I have fixed most of the BIGSLEEP issues. And i disagree with the comments @ffmpeg (Kieran) has made about google. From all companies, google has been the most helpfull & nice
This is a common excuse, but it's not actually true, and also not how copyright law works. Whether a use is educational is not the primary determiner of whether something is fair use - it's whether or not the use affected the commercial viability of the thing being copied.
The reason that humans learning from artwork can be found fair use under copyright law is because humans learning to draw from other humans has not been shown to affect commercial viability of the original work. This is because human artistic output tends to be rate-limited, and there aren't that many humans who learn to create art in a particular style regardless.
While originality and educational use are both things that might help establish fair use in the absence of a market effect, if there is a demonstrable market effect it is very hard to show fair use. This is likely to be the case with AI art, since machines can generate a lot more art (not to mention copying a lot more exactly), and they are in fact marketed as being replacements for human artists.
In summary, at least in this particular sense, copyright law already correctly accounted for the difference between humans and machines, even though that wasn't specifically something it was designed to deal with.