It is that, but it's also your speed. When running, you typically pick a pace that's slower than your max, so it can be sustained for the full distance.
"Pace yourself" doesn't specifically mean "slow down", it actually means to maximize your speed across the full race. In other words it can mean speeding up when you look at the average pace across the entire event.
Yes, and pacing also stops you running too fast at the beginning of the race and blowing up. I believe "we can finish the overall race faster" is part of the metaphor they were aiming for.
I'm viewing the site on lightmode, clicked one of the #links which scrolled down the page, when I scrolled back up all the sections lost their content and were unusable.
I've never seen someone fail a static page like this. And from a huge company like Cloudflare too..
I mean..."close to true" is another way of saying "false". It could easily have been phrased in a way that was actually true and gotten plenty of upvotes instead.
I'm confused by the headline being a headline here at all. Irregular being involved in OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta incidents has been well-known for over a month[0][1]. It's literally the only thing I know about the Meta incident.
Fair, "widely known" might be exaggerating, but I'm confused as to why it's news now. Is there anything new, or is it just a legible summary just came out?
I have this as a bash script and a some similar bash and python scripts for converting between python's print(my_dict) and json, or to run some python (mostly the dicts) through black.
The j2p is pretty self-evident if you know any python, and the only trick to p2j was knowing `ast.literal_eval(input_str)`.
Because they're crawling a billion webpages, only a tiny fraction of which can be git cloned, and configuring a special case just for that tiny fraction isn't worth the effort (of the crawlers).
> So, you'd think that something that pretends to be “Artificial Intelligence” would use the most efficient way of using our data for training purposes, right? Clone the repos, walk every commit. Done.
If repos like this were 10%+ of what they crawled, having a special case for clone-able repos would be smart, but if you're crawling everything, you're not going to do an efficiency tweak for each special case that has a more parse-able option.
I guess GitHub is in a similar bunch of sources, it should be also more efficient to crawl by cloning.
Anyway, isn’t it the whole sales pitch that it generates tailored solutions fast?
This tick about "if AI smart how come crawler dumb" is in most complaints I've read about AI crawlers and I've started to find it pretty annoying. The crawlers might be written using AI but they're evidently not actually running AI inference over the pages they get back--besides being able to tell this from the behavior, if this is pretraining input, that's enormous scale, so it'd mean a large increase in effective training cost. Naively assume inference costs are equal to pretraining costs (probably not true but maybe right order-of-magnitude) and it's a doubling.
This ends up tacitly turning a very legitimate complaint (ill-behaved crawlers) into a justification for head-in-the-sand AI denialism.
There's nothing "denialist" about recognizing the utter stupidity of systems that are being mislabeled as "AI". You judge a tool by its results, and the results have been very poor indeed. The only heads in the sand are those whose owners continually refuse to recognize the proofs before their very eyes that there's zero intelligence here.
That's head-in-the-sand stuff. AI is certainly very capable of being dumb (as are humans). But:
> “The problem was in need of a new real idea, which this new result seems to provide,” says James Maynard, a mathematician at the University of Oxford. “It seems that the AI has made a genuinely interesting mathematical contribution.”
Nobody a decade ago would have said "oh yeah solving a bunch of open problems in research mathematics, and finding a bunch of zero days in Chrome and Firefox, and winning literature prizes, are things that don't require intelligence."
>AI is certainly very capable of being dumb (as are humans).
I wonder how exactly the average scraper got to be so inefficient on kernel.org.
Did someone prompt a SotA model to write the most generic scraper possible?
Did someone prompt an old local model on their laptop to write a kernel.org scraper?
Perhaps no LLMs were involved in the first place. Seems to me there isn't much relation between how good a random scraper is and how usable/effective Mythos/Sol's outputs can be.
Yeah, and the number also is not of all exports, but of goods exports (as opposed to total, which includes both goods and services).
In 2024, fishing/marine products was ~18% of total exports, which is still a massive deal, but only half as massive. (I believe tourism, the largest "export", is close to 40% of total exports.)
"Pace yourself" specifically means "slow down".
reply