"Stupid individual" ?

You're even using Trump's language.

Dunno what your problem is - you might want to go outside and touch grass.

Boston Dynamics has always made the most capable humanoid robots, but it's not clear what the market is for them. Their dog-like Spot seems to sell to police forces and military and serves a purpose to go where no human can safely go.

Musk is projecting a market in the millions for his TeslaBot, but various Chinese companies like Unitree already have humanoid robots for sale and don't seem to be finding much of a market for them yet outside of quirky hospitality/entertainment usage. Some companies evaluating them for industrial use, but AFAIK no large scale adopters.

The analogy went whoosh right over your head, didn't it?

Dumbass.

Looks like your boy Trump just took a whipping today.

RSI doesn't mean anything specific - it is just a hypey way of saying that you've automated the job of engineers working to improve the model, regardless of how pedestrian that work may at times be.

Weight values control what tokens get predicted/emitted.

Reasoning (to be understood in context as LLM regurgative reasoning) is ended by emitting an "end-think" token, otherwise it will continue.

The overly dramatic headline might have fooled you into believing that Astra was programming Qwen directly, as a possible alternative to training, but if you actually read the article the reality is just that Astra fixed a bug in Qwen so that it predicted (emitted) the "end-think" token at the appropriate time.

The defect was noted on Qwen's model card - there is no indication that Astra figured out for itself. What Astra did was apply it's mech interp knowledge to locate and fix the source(s) of the bug.

Saying that Astra boosted Qwen's math score is like saying that I boosted the top speed of your car when all I really did was fix your flat tire (which did allow you to drive faster).

Astra didn't do anything to specifically improve Qwen's math ability, but rather fixed an unwanted behavior of the model, noted on it's model card, of it continuing reasoning for too long when it should have stopped - failure to emit a token at the right time.

A less dramatic headline would have been "Astra fixes Qwen bug by modifying its weights". This is mechanistic interpret-ability stuff that researchers already know how to do.

Still cool, but isn't AI making AI smarter the way the headline invites you to think. It's a bug fix, but in a model's weights rather than in code.

Then use the MacBook ;-)

Why would I do that when the room is full of air that can distribute the heat?

If you want a fanless computer then try a MacBook Air.

The TPU being used is the Trillium v6e which draws 300W.

According to Tom's Hardware heat dissipation is what limits runtime to 15 min, which is presumably why they only run one TPU at a time despite having the power (1kW) to run 2 or 3 of them, since heating would be proportional to how many are running, and max runtime would presumably reduce accordingly.

https://www.tomshardware.com/t...

It seems we have entered the era of bullshit tech "demos" - Musk's empty shell of a car that can fly for 3 sec on compressed air, and now Google's "datacenter in space" that can run 1 TPU for 15 min before overheating.

> However, the power demands of the TPU mean it can only turn one on for about 20 minutes at a time

They've got 4 TPUs (Trillium v6e) on board, but can only power one at a time, and even then only for 20min (I assume this means it runs from battery, not direct from solar).

It's a bit like me calling my desktop computer a "datacenter", except my desktop computer can run continuously, not just for 20 min at a time.

Sure, but Google are trying, not altogether successfully, to navigate this potentially dangerous (for them) transition. It's also been a while, predating LLMs, since Google search was keyword based - they've been trying to interpret the search input for a while - to treat it like a question which is how users have intuitively expected it to behave.

IMO at this point Google is giving us the worst of both worlds, old and new, rather than embracing the switch to AI-based question answering and follow-on conversation/drill down. I guess part of the problem is that in order to provide a free (ad supported) service they need to keep cost down which means using a cheaper/less capable model, as well as the fact that until fairly recently Google's best wasn't that great.

It seems that the entire purpose of Proton is as a security and privacy conscious alternative to Google, and as soon as they abandon those core tenets they've got nothing ...

Perception over security ? Sounds like the CEO thinks his customers are idiots.

Exactly - it's the kind of app where the difficultly is all in the details and security, not in getting a prototype up and running.

No doubt a non-developer "product manager" can vibe code a prototype - I don't doubt that. I highly doubt that a non-developer will be able to guide AI to developing something secure and bug free,

I'm not so sure about that... I think Microsoft and Amazon are better positioned to benefit from cloud-based AI.

Google seem to be messing up in the say they are addressing AI Chat as a competitor to search. With keyword-based and "human-ranked" (pagerank) search they really had a near-monopoly, even owning the verb to "google" for something. Bing is OK, but never had any advantage over the default of Google, and there was no other real competition.

For some inexplicable reason Google seem to be abandoning traditional search - just getting worse and worse - rather than just augmenting with AI mode and AI overview, while not going all-in on the alternative of ad-supported AI Chat as the alternative.... Given the threat of AI chat eating search, where they had a near monopoly, they've chosen to shoot themselves in the foot and weaken search while competing poorly in AI chat where there is much more competition and they are far from market leader.