Why ask whether china is eroding the lead; rather than whether the incumbents are maintaining it?

Maybe my faith is weak and if I were huffing the dumb money I'd understand; but it looks awfully like our boisterous little hypebeasts promised that, this time, unlike all the other times in 'AI' we could totally brute force our way to the AGI Omnissiah; briefly tried copium in the form of hoping that competitors would be intimidated by their capex(because there's basically a generation of VCs who think that failure to reach monopoly is indistinguishable from losing); and finally proceeded to speedrun commodification because it turns out that nobody actually had any plan for what would happen if this alley started looking visually impaired even after we plundered the entire internet to feed it.

I realize that it's more fun to focus on what the sinister chinese are doing than what our glorious golden boys are not doing; but let's do the latter anyway; especially since this is one area where you can't just please chinese factory slaves as an inherent price advantage. The guys mechanical-turking out 'training'/'classification' tasks will all go wherever to scrape up the cheapest labor available, then stiff them on promised payments; and (while the process is pretty porous) being not-china is definitely still the best way to get access to premium TSMC processes; and at least not-worse for most of the rest of the most interesting ones.

Either LLMs are fundamentally a technology where being the first mover is a dumb idea; or the 'leaders' are actively fucking it; because, unlike some of the cases involving rare earths mining or finding fast fashion sweatshop sites, this was theirs to lose.

I assume that there's a research OS somewhere that has discovered that this is much harder than it looks for anything nontrivial; quite possibly even worse than the problem that it is intended to cure; but looking at the increasingly elaborate constructs used when sudo is intended to be a granular delegation makes me wonder if the correct approach lies down the path of better permissions rather than ad-hoc lockdown logic.

There are some cases(eg. password-change or login tools often both reflect granularity limits in credential storage; and make reads or edits on your behalf to parts of files that you wouldn't be allowed to touch directly; but also do things like enforce complexity or age requirements that would require a really expansive view of 'permissions' to encompass) where the delegate program is handling nontrivial delegation logic on its own; but in a lot of instances it's hard to escape the impression that you are basically bodging on 'roles' that can't be or aren't normally expressed in object and device permissions by building carefully selectively broken tools.

I obviously don't blame sudo for that; its scope is letting you run a particular thing as someone else if the sudoers file allows it; but a lot of sudoers files might as well just say "there are no roles on this system between 'useless' and 'apocalyptic'"; and that feels like a permissions design problem.

Of note; probably not one to try to NT yourself out of; I'm not sure that you can build a sufficiently expressive set of permissions on classic UNIX style ones; but I've yet to see an NT-derived system that didn't boil down to 'admin-which-can-be-SYSTEM-at-a-whim'/'little people' regardless of the wacky NT ACL tricks you can get up to.

I'm curious if it's a case of the alternatives being tried and largely found to be worse; or if (along with a number of other OS design/architecture fights) the whole thing has mostly been pushed out of mainstream relevance by the degree to which you can just pretend everything inside a worker VM is basically at a homogeneous privilege level if you don't want to deal with it.

I was indeed able to imagine it.

If this is true for you, you need a better imagination.

Sometimes I wonder if the focus on the AI race is just an attempt to distract China from building things that would actually improve their economy, like infrastructure or health services. Suddenly they are obsessed with building the best chatbot, whereas America is quietly improving missile defense systems.

These chips were mentioned above: Have they been independently tested to meet their claims? Considering they have just been released only in China, the answer is probably no.

And they have reviewed these Longsoon chips?

It's not that big of a deal. If you knew the libraries involved, his winning entry would take you 10 minutes to code. The advantage of the AI here is that it suggests which libraries to use, and how to connect them. Here is the code if you want to check it out.

Cheating worked for Tom Brady.

That's normal for PMs, minimal to no coding skills. That is not their job.

Here is his website. Nice, (but the top menu bar is among the most irritating I've ever seen).

Here is his code for the winning hackathon entry he made. It uses Gradio, which is a library I was unaware of, but looks interesting.

His linkedin has the following skills listed:

Are you quoting ChatGPT? Here is science: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/a...

It depends on what kind of CS you are doing. Donald Knuth does a lot of programming as a computer scientist.

It's almost certainly because you didn't do enough programming in college.

Ideally an introduction course should be a course where you come in, sit down, and program all class period. For an entire semester. They can read the course material between classes (that is the new homework). By the end of the semester, the students will have written a lot of code, and have a decent introduction to programming.

What is a management trap?