DeepSeek will deprecate the v4 Pro model (it will route to v4.1 Flash starting 14 Sep). Unsure what comes next, but I'd wager a bigger model à la Kimi K3: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49639667

Turkish as well. They moved from Arabic to Latin script.

It could be argued that Turkish and simplified Chinese succeeded simply because they were supported by, you could even say imposed by, a government that controls > 90% of the population speaking the language. Neither was the case for Arabic: there is no single government spanning that proportion of Arabic speakers, and from how I read the article, it seems no government really supported Unified Arabic to any extent even remotely comparable to Turkish and simplified Chinese.

I absolutely loathe my LG smart TV. Just switching to another input requires 3 button press.

I hope someone uses their free time to hack the OS and offer a clean and simple interface to make it a “dumb” TV.

I’m unaware of any projects trying to make a dumb tv, but I like the idea. You can start with rootmy.tv and research from there.

You're not wrong, but you could ask your favorite LLM to interact with the LG API's to switch the input for you. At least for my case, it was ~10 minutes of work to develop a small tray app that looks for a specific USB device and switches the TV input if it gets inserted. I don't really even touch the remote anymore

I have a question about “domain expertise” as a component of future knowledge worker requirements. How does one gain such expertise in a context where thinking is expected to be delegated to AI (shifting from problem solving to question asking, as noted in this paper)?

How does one learn to pose the right questions when basic ones are rarely “manually” answered? that is, without an AI assistant’s help

This pattern appears in schools, where AI interferes with human development that typically demands long and difficult effort of actually answering questions

How do you become a baker, in a world of bread factories.

I think the answer lies in baking the good old fashioned way and ignoring the factories.

Fine for bread, but I don't think most customers are interested in the artisanal aspects of business operations.

Then again, if the permanent underclass hypothesis turns out to be true, baking the old way may become the only choice.

For certain functionality, we import libraries. For others, we've handwritten solutions. Even so — sometimes we have to crack open the repo for a library to really dig in to what's going on. That seems to go for domain experts as well.

I think we've always been working with the scenarios of what's solved for us and what we need to solve manually. AI is certainly not an abstraction layer, but there are ways to use it where you are still driving, learning, and shipping.

> The company on Wednesday confirmed speculation that the Ox Alpha model is a new iteration of its GLM series and said it will release the weights for it tonight, in response to queries by Bloomberg News.

Seems legit.

It's really hard to know how good it is. So much hype around it.

I mean, you can try it for free.

wow i totally missed "It Was Just an Accident". Have to watch asap.

Hmmm... I had a different experience. They had a fully automated environment where you ha to write test that passes some tests. No human involved. And the time requirement was insanely tight

Interesting, I'm wondering if that varies depending on the hiring team? Or maybe my experience wasn't standard as it was part of an acquisition process, though I'm pretty sure I did all the steps of their interview process. Or we were in different tracks. I don't know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I did find my interviews (with humans) to be quite tight too

WORK FASTER, SLAVE! FASTER!

That's a lot of words to say you need larger set of questions for today's models. 300 questions won't be enough to find the difference

> one of the basic tenants of algorithm development was that you can't just brute-force your way towards a solution for some complex problems

Mote-Carlo is pretty useful still. Not sure if your statement holds

Do you think any programmer really understands how their program works end-to-end? At some abstraction layer, we're all clueless. There are many layers between what you type into the text editor and the actual CPU ticks that make your program work. I bet nobody fully understands the whole stack.

Now that that text editor accepts English, we're all calling each other names, etc.

I didn't say that Real Hackers™ understood every single thing perfectly from editor to electrons. You've made up a strawman and then beaten it.

I can’t believe the nerve of that guy to straw man your no true Scotsman like that

That is... also a strawman. There are less skilled bad actors. There are more skilled bad actors. The bottom rung is script kiddies, so named because they just run other people's scripts. They are not Scottish.

Reddit tier garbage thread ngl.

Used to be, knowing a ret from a nop (90) meant something. If you can just load up a model and say "hack teh NSA.gov" while not actually knowing anything about even DNS, what are we even doing?

LOIC (a DDoS tool) worked that way. Xbox voice chat kids would just agree to open up LOIC, type nsa.gov and all hit start at the same time.

While most don't, there are developers who actually do understand systems from end to end. Most developers are terrible developers, compared to the really good ones.

> While most don't, there are developers who actually do understand systems from end to end

The last time intel made a CPU where the entire thing could fit in one persons head was probably the 8086 or thereabounts.

There is no one developer or engineer at apple that understands everything going on from key press to bits moving around to print the characters I see when I type in this text box.

Correct. There are people who understand more and less and none of it. The latter are called script kiddies.