Decompiling 2024: A Year of Resurgance in Decompilation Research

Re:Decompiling 2024: A Year of Resurgance in Decompilation R... by ahartmetz on Friday January 31, 2025 @08:47AM (#42887592)

I know that these algorithms are the best that exists for many tasks, but any non-deterministic non-provable algorithm is still technically a heuristic. Also, currently, the bitter lesson seems to be that more of the same runs into diminishing returns, contrary to "The Bitter Lesson"(tm). There will probably be a better AI architecture at some point, but "lol just add more GPUs / data / RAM" times are kind of over for now.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Decompiling 2024: A Year of Resurgance in Decompilation R... by sitkack on Friday January 31, 2025 @11:12AM (#42888932)

You are misinterpreting the bitter lesson, it only gets more bitter with time!

The arxiv paper is well written, worth a read.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Decompiling 2024: A Year of Resurgance in Decompilation R... by ahartmetz on Friday January 31, 2025 @12:48PM (#42889784)

I don't think that I misunderstood - it says that more computing power beats "hand-engineering". But more computing power doesn't seem to work that well anymore to improve AI performance - and there is not much more computing power coming in the next couple of years, not orders of magnitude more for free like it used to be. Case in point: the somewhat disappointing new nVidia generation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Decompiling 2024: A Year of Resurgance in Decompilation R... by sitkack on Friday January 31, 2025 @03:16PM (#42891414)

> it says that more computing power beats "hand-engineering".

This is the simplistic tl;dr, but that isn't what is says. You should reread the essay and the linked arxiv paper.

It is much more than throwing more compute at a problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]