cpdm

be here now

[深夜漫遊放送 @shinya_manyu]

Re：ゼロから始める異世界学園生活・序（同人アニメ）

-#リゼロ #Reゼロ #菜月昴 #ベアトリス #Reゼロファンアニメ

[Tom Krcha @tomkrcha]

I had an early access to GPT-6 Astra and I can say, everyone in the world now has a 3D designer at their fingertips.
I gave it an image of a house and asked to create it in 3D with all the details including toys, appliances and furniture. This a full 3D model reconstruction in Blender with geometry that you can manually tweak and run 60fps as a locally rendered "game" on device.

[OpenAI @OpenAI]

This is GPT-6 Astra.

Anything you can do on a computer, Astra can do for you. Fast.

[Paul Graham @paulg]

Someone asked what I'd do if I were 17. I'd learn how to build LLMs from scratch, and then train ones as powerful as I could with whatever hardware I could get access to.

[Demis Hassabis @demishassabis]

https://t.co/PTeDiv1b6L

[Paul Graham @paulg]

How to Earn a Billion Dollars: https://t.co/WeWBUkKym6

[淘沙者(TheSandPicker) @Etudecn]

这段马斯克 2003 年在斯坦福的 45 分钟闭门演讲，真的有点东西。
不是那种空话连篇的创业鸡汤。
而是他亲自把“怎么从 0 搞出一家公司”一层层拆给你看。
更狠的是，
他没在讲概念，直接把自己当时手里那三家公司，到底怎么活下来的，整个过程都摊开了。
这种内容放到今天看都不过时。

很多人听完的反应都很统一：
这 45 分钟，顶得上你翻十本创业书。
那种真正能用的干货，往往就藏在这种老素材里，不吵不闹，但句句都是实战。

[cpdm @cpdmqiu]

@elonmusk @Tesla_AI @grok what does taping out mean here

[jack @jack]

https://t.co/jgZkBvYOPt

[Andrej Karpathy @karpathy]

Three days ago I left autoresearch tuning nanochat for ~2 days on depth=12 model. It found ~20 changes that improved the validation loss. I tested these changes yesterday and all of them were additive and transferred to larger (depth=24) models. Stacking up all of these changes, today I measured that the leaderboard's "Time to GPT-2" drops from 2.02 hours to 1.80 hours (~11% improvement), this will be the new leaderboard entry. So yes, these are real improvements and they make an actual difference. I am mildly surprised that my very first naive attempt already worked this well on top of what I thought was already a fairly manually well-tuned project.

This is a first for me because I am very used to doing the iterative optimization of neural network training manually. You come up with ideas, you implement them, you check if they work (better validation loss), you come up with new ideas based on that, you read some papers for inspiration, etc etc. This is the bread and butter of what I do daily for 2 decades. Seeing the agent do this entire workflow end-to-end and all by itself as it worked through approx. 700 changes autonomously is wild. It really looked at the sequence of results of experiments and used that to plan the next ones. It's not novel, ground-breaking "research" (yet), but all the adjustments are "real", I didn't find them manually previously, and they stack up and actually improved nanochat. Among the bigger things e.g.:

- It noticed an oversight that my parameterless QKnorm didn't have a scaler multiplier attached, so my attention was too diffuse. The agent found multipliers to sharpen it, pointing to future work.
- It found that the Value Embeddings really like regularization and I wasn't applying any (oops).
- It found that my banded attention was too conservative (i forgot to tune it).
- It found that AdamW betas were all messed up.
- It tuned the weight decay schedule.
- It tuned the network initialization.

This is on top of all the tuning I've already done over a good amount of time. The exact commit is here, from this "round 1" of autoresearch. I am going to kick off "round 2", and in parallel I am looking at how multiple agents can collaborate to unlock parallelism.
https://t.co/WAz8aIztKT

All LLM frontier labs will do this. It's the final boss battle. It's a lot more complex at scale of course - you don't just have a single train. py file to tune. But doing it is "just engineering" and it's going to work. You spin up a swarm of agents, you have them collaborate to tune smaller models, you promote the most promising ideas to increasingly larger scales, and humans (optionally) contribute on the edges.

And more generally, *any* metric you care about that is reasonably efficient to evaluate (or that has more efficient proxy metrics such as training a smaller network) can be autoresearched by an agent swarm. It's worth thinking about whether your problem falls into this bucket too.

[Andrej Karpathy @karpathy]

It is hard to communicate how much programming has changed due to AI in the last 2 months: not gradually and over time in the "progress as usual" way, but specifically this last December. There are a number of asterisks but imo coding agents basically didn’t work before December and basically work since - the models have significantly higher quality, long-term coherence and tenacity and they can power through large and long tasks, well past enough that it is extremely disruptive to the default programming workflow.

Just to give an example, over the weekend I was building a local video analysis dashboard for the cameras of my home so I wrote: “Here is the local IP and username/password of my DGX Spark. Log in, set up ssh keys, set up vLLM, download and bench Qwen3-VL, set up a server endpoint to inference videos, a basic web ui dashboard, test everything, set it up with systemd, record memory notes for yourself and write up a markdown report for me”. The agent went off for ~30 minutes, ran into multiple issues, researched solutions online, resolved them one by one, wrote the code, tested it, debugged it, set up the services, and came back with the report and it was just done. I didn’t touch anything. All of this could easily have been a weekend project just 3 months ago but today it’s something you kick off and forget about for 30 minutes.

As a result, programming is becoming unrecognizable. You’re not typing computer code into an editor like the way things were since computers were invented, that era is over. You're spinning up AI agents, giving them tasks *in English* and managing and reviewing their work in parallel. The biggest prize is in figuring out how you can keep ascending the layers of abstraction to set up long-running orchestrator Claws with all of the right tools, memory and instructions that productively manage multiple parallel Code instances for you. The leverage achievable via top tier "agentic engineering" feels very high right now.

It’s not perfect, it needs high-level direction, judgement, taste, oversight, iteration and hints and ideas. It works a lot better in some scenarios than others (e.g. especially for tasks that are well-specified and where you can verify/test functionality). The key is to build intuition to decompose the task just right to hand off the parts that work and help out around the edges. But imo, this is nowhere near "business as usual" time in software.

[Elvis @elvissun]

https://t.co/DotZ3V6XhJ

[cpdm @cpdmqiu]

@AnthropicAI @grok wdyt

[Andrew Ng @AndrewYNg]

Job seekers in the U.S. and many other nations face a tough environment. At the same time, fears of AI-caused job loss have — so far — been overblown. However, the demand for AI skills is starting to cause shifts in the job market. I’d like to share what I’m seeing on the ground.

First, many tech companies have laid off workers over the past year. While some CEOs cited AI as the reason — that AI is doing the work, so people are no longer needed — the reality is AI just doesn’t work that well yet. Many of the layoffs have been corrections for overhiring during the pandemic or general cost-cutting and reorganization that occasionally happened even before modern AI. Outside of a handful of roles, few layoffs have resulted from jobs being automated by AI.
Granted, this may grow in the future. People who are currently in some professions that are highly exposed to AI automation, such as call-center operators, translators, and voice actors, are likely to struggle to find jobs and/or see declining salaries. But widespread job losses have been overhyped.

Instead, a common refrain applies: AI won’t replace workers, but workers who use AI will replace workers who don’t. For instance, because AI coding tools make developers much more efficient, developers who know how to use them are increasingly in-demand. (If you want to be one of these people, please take our short courses on Claude Code, Gemini CLI, and Agentic Skills!)

So AI is leading to job losses, but in a subtle way. Some businesses are letting go of employees who are not adapting to AI and replacing them with people who are. This trend is already obvious in software development. Further, in many startups’ hiring patterns, I am seeing early signs of this type of personnel replacement in roles that traditionally are considered non-technical. Marketers, recruiters, and analysts who know how to code with AI are more productive than those who don’t, so some businesses are slowly parting ways with employees that aren’t able to adapt. I expect this will accelerate.

At the same time, when companies build new teams that are AI native, sometimes the new teams are smaller than the ones they replace. AI makes individuals more effective, and this makes it possible to shrink team sizes. For example, as AI has made building software easier, the bottleneck is shifting to deciding what to build — this is the Product Management (PM) bottleneck. A project that used to be assigned to 8 engineers and 1 PM might now be assigned to 2 engineers and 1 PM, or perhaps even to a single person with a mix of engineering and product skills.

The good news for employees is that most businesses have a lot of work to do and not enough people to do it. People with the right AI skills are often given opportunities to step up and do more, and maybe tackle the long backlog of ideas that couldn’t be executed before AI made the work go more quickly. I’m seeing many employees in many businesses step up to build new things that help their business. Opportunities abound!

I know these changes are stressful. My heart goes out to every family that has been affected by a layoff, to every job seeker struggling to find the role they want, and to the far larger number of people who are worried about their future job prospects. Fortunately, there’s still time to learn and position yourself well for where the job market is going. When it comes to AI, the vast majority of people, technical or nontechnical, are at the starting line, or they were recently. So this remains a great time to keep learning and keep building, and the opportunities for those who do are numerous!

[Original text; https://t.co/zbIhZHfCC0 ]

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

SpaceX will build a system that allows anyone to travel to Moon.

This will so insanely cool 🚀💫🤩

[泥伏雷闯关记 @Nicole_yang88]

贝佐斯50分钟，胜过两年 MBA。

2005 年，贝佐斯在斯坦福商学院的一场 50 分钟演讲，

讲透了许多人读完两年 MBA 仍没真正想明白的创新与增长逻辑。

[Madhura @madhurahoval]

The YC Formula: land 100 users at $100 a month → hit $10K MRR

[Andrej Karpathy @karpathy]

Excited to release new repo: nanochat!
(it's among the most unhinged I've written).

Unlike my earlier similar repo nanoGPT which only covered pretraining, nanochat is a minimal, from scratch, full-stack training/inference pipeline of a simple ChatGPT clone in a single, dependency-minimal codebase. You boot up a cloud GPU box, run a single script and in as little as 4 hours later you can talk to your own LLM in a ChatGPT-like web UI.

It weighs ~8,000 lines of imo quite clean code to:

- Train the tokenizer using a new Rust implementation
- Pretrain a Transformer LLM on FineWeb, evaluate CORE score across a number of metrics
- Midtrain on user-assistant conversations from SmolTalk, multiple choice questions, tool use.
- SFT, evaluate the chat model on world knowledge multiple choice (ARC-E/C, MMLU), math (GSM8K), code (HumanEval)
- RL the model optionally on GSM8K with "GRPO"
- Efficient inference the model in an Engine with KV cache, simple prefill/decode, tool use (Python interpreter in a lightweight sandbox), talk to it over CLI or ChatGPT-like WebUI.
- Write a single markdown report card, summarizing and gamifying the whole thing.

Even for as low as ~$100 in cost (~4 hours on an 8XH100 node), you can train a little ChatGPT clone that you can kind of talk to, and which can write stories/poems, answer simple questions. About ~12 hours surpasses GPT-2 CORE metric. As you further scale up towards ~$1000 (~41.6 hours of training), it quickly becomes a lot more coherent and can solve simple math/code problems and take multiple choice tests. E.g. a depth 30 model trained for 24 hours (this is about equal to FLOPs of GPT-3 Small 125M and 1/1000th of GPT-3) gets into 40s on MMLU and 70s on ARC-Easy, 20s on GSM8K, etc.

My goal is to get the full "strong baseline" stack into one cohesive, minimal, readable, hackable, maximally forkable repo. nanochat will be the capstone project of LLM101n (which is still being developed). I think it also has potential to grow into a research harness, or a benchmark, similar to nanoGPT before it. It is by no means finished, tuned or optimized (actually I think there's likely quite a bit of low-hanging fruit), but I think it's at a place where the overall skeleton is ok enough that it can go up on GitHub where all the parts of it can be improved.

Link to repo and a detailed walkthrough of the nanochat speedrun is in the reply.

[cpdm @cpdmqiu]

@Mr_L__1 Would u be holding gsrt through the merger/ticker change?

[Y Combinator @ycombinator]

Paul Graham’s recipe for doing great work: