xyzzy123
Apparently I can pay for partial solutions to the Riemann hypothesis but if my question involves a crackme or something that is an existential risk somehow.
For this genre of task execution can run with limited horizon and is independent but would be too expensive to do with "us frontier tokens", I think for these, there is value in availability of cheaper tokens.
I'm not sure from your description if you control the geometry of the sensor part (i.e, can the clamp be integral to the sensor housing or does it need to be a separate part) also ignores the internals, etc etc.
One thing I noticed is that off the bat, it did think about the assembly in general terms but would need guidance to think harder about FDM limitations and layer orientation etc. These are not good designs for printing. A good dev loop and git history help with these kinds of revisions.
The general principle is that if your domain is verifiable at all, give the model tools and a workflow that constrain and check its output. You want the LLM arguing with the geometry kernel instead of you.
To fully close the loop you print parts as fast and possible and concretely see where they suck.
Recommend doing this in a coding harness not a chat box.
The reason I think you might have more success with this is that the model is mostly thinking about the part in words, which it can convert to a part design in CAD in code. LLMs are really good at coding. Also means it can use relative positioning and relationships.
You will be able to iterate more easily, compare things, compute properties, commit to git etc. The process is more reproducible and steerable than generative production of images.
When the LLM can look at renders of the geometry it generated, it’s easier for it to discriminate when it’s producing nonsense like misaligned parts, things that don’t fit, etc. It’s still going to kind of suck, but it will be better. The whole process of code -> render -> inspect forces the model to put up or shut up and provides grounding. Meshes > bloviating.
As far as I know today's LLMs don't have a "visual imagination" but a process like this could be a slow approximation of one. They clearly do have SOME spatial understanding (pelican tests show us that!) but it feels really non-human.
One thing missing from this is kinesthetics. Personally I am mostly not thinking in accurate visuals in mechanical design. I am imagining how the parts feel and kind of how they move and what slips first and what bends and what feels heavy. Imagining what my hands would feel. But I don't think I trust LLMs to evaluate that stuff by writing simulation code yet.
The others suffered "ecosystem collapse". With Oxide you won't be stuck on a "burning platform", your main risk is that the value prop for the hardware & management experience doesn't play out.
This is the same idea as switching power supplies but planes had to solve that before power semiconductors were cheap enough.
The power frequency also has an impact on the size of all the induction motors.
I guess if you were designing it from scratch today you would let the generator produce power at whatever frequency the mechanical engineers tell you they want to and the power electronics could convert it without problems. You would do the same thing the other way around on the motors.
The "halting problem is unsolvable" argument relies on the oracle not being able to output "not sure". But adding that option admits trivial oracles, like ones which output "not sure" for everything, so some are better than others.
The "real world" use most people have for halting oracles is as part of software safety, where if the checker outputs "not sure" you modify the software until the checker can decide if it halts.
All we need now is some sort of program to evaluate halting problem oracles...
There is some difference; when you install WordPress or Ghost, your problems are shared. There's a community that goes along with the software and a "shared understanding in the world" of how it works and where the rough edges and limitations are. A lot of the time, LLMs will actually be better at modifying WordPress or Ghost to do what you want than they will be at fixing the CMS you built last Tuesday.
When you custom build, you can get an exact fit for your needs but your misery is yours alone.
If you don't have a useful mental model of the architecture that's a communication / review / documentation problem, not a problem with the entire idea of codegen.
At any given time many people have problems with one or more of those systems. Money is easy to run out of because it's used for everything, the government can be slow and difficult, relationships can fray, people can be isolated, etc. Food banks exist as a backstop for when the regular means of allocating are not working.
The problem isn't "scarcity" per se, it's more of an allocation thing. Who has a claim on enough food to stay alive? Everyone! But what foods can they claim? How much? What specific channel / institution (with associated allocation rules) will distribute it to them? What are the conditions and controls? etc.
Allocating things can be difficult. An allocation mechanism with no controls will see fraud, waste and abuse. Even when an institution is willing to give things away no questions asked, there are (often invisible until you think about them) conditions like "please don't claim huge quantities and resell what we're giving you, that would be unfair to others".
My brother had a neighbour build a crematorium next door in NZ; not an industrial or rural area, just the suburbs, no permits, no consultation, no notification. Very entrepreneurial. They got shut down but the flip side of "you can just do things" is surprises like a plume of smoke and the smell of burning corpses when you step outside.
Interpretations of complex webs of facts often diverge along tribal lines and bias can easily leak through when editors need to decide which interpretations are authoritative.
For some reason with people it goes the other way around.
I can see the other side of it though, too. For socially contentious issues, one reason some people want the state to decide is that they personally do not want to be dragged into litigating the issue every time it comes up for contexts they are personally involved in. It's tiring and can be extremely complex to navigate in a sensitive way within complex social environments.
> But does that always hold true? Let’s take the other side for a second by examining a much higher-priced SaaS product. Gemini reports that the price of a fully loaded Salesforce seat is ~$500/mo. Say you need 50 seats, that’s $25k/mo!
> For that price you could have 1.5x engineering resources (25 / 16.7) working on your clone full time. Once again, a CRM’s a reasonably complex piece of software and a rebuild wouldn’t be trivial, but no matter how you construe it, this is closer to a “build” decision, even for a smaller company. (And with Salesforce down 30% YTD, the markets seem to believe it too.)
If $25k for salesforce is too much, my view is that your first thought should be to look for a cheaper competitor, not build a thing?
Ok, you vibed your own. Great! Now you need custom integrations for everything, you can't hire out of the market, you have to re-train everyone and all new starters, you have an extra thing to HA, monitor, back up etc. People can't google for answers about it anymore. This is before we can talk about what it actually costs in terms of bikeshedding, roadmap creation, project management, product management etc etc. Plus compliance, security, your org policies and relevant regulations if you're storing personal information. Think of how many meetings it would take to get this done, the political costs, and how much it costs to get consensus in big companies.
There is also RISK. Nobody is gonna get fired for choosing SalesForce, but there are many different angles by which building an in-house solution for something considered commodity (tho an expensive one) can go horribly wrong.
The more subtle cost is _brain space_. Human engineers have context limits too; switching projects has costs, and you can't put ONE engineer on the thing and expect it to be sustainable. You need about a minimum of four people to understand anything you expect to maintain and operate long term.
Your org's capacity for engineering focus is precious and IMHO you should try really hard not to use it on non-core stuff unless you have to.
If I had to describe it in aesthetic terms I would maybe say brutalism?
Probably CI is the better primitive, I usually use gitlab though and I felt "put off" by all their native AI features being license gated.
Unless one of us happens to be a food producer we will both starve. We need our trade graph to be connected to resources we need.
Production also tends to need exclusive access to resources (land, materials, etc) and you will be competing with machines for access to those.
> The reason we have an economy and money and trade is that we need to incentivize people to produce all the stuff that people consume, and manage those finite resources constrained by people’s finite time. But you can do away with all that messiness of all that exchange and just have AI micromanage the economy. AI should be able to figure out how much to produce, how to limit waste, who should get what, etc. in a very fair and efficient manner.
Who owns the robots though (plus scarce exclusionary inputs), and how are you connected to the part of the trade graph that produces abundance?
> If there’s no limit on production, and no need for human labor, then we don’t need to incentivize people to work, or try to bound the amount people consume by the value of what they’ve produced.
This is very much a question about who controls the means of production.
Also the waste heat of linears constrains your design in terms of weight, power density, how big you need to make the enclosure, etc.
For reference I looked at what I'd need to buy on AliExpress to power my laptop off the cheapest linear PSU I could find (say 20v 5A), something like: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005003397909174.html - it weighs 4kg vs 300g for the charger I have. Apparently there ARE audio people who put their NAS on a linear PSU (I did not realise that was a thing!) but I'm going to try to forget I saw that.
The very best environments will have other kids who are engaged. It is induction into a culture, with its own language, ways of thinking and values. If you can't find that directly, you have to do your best to create a mini version as a family.
You can turn almost anything into a little maths games, card or dice games provide an opportunity for probability puzzles, the environment provides things to estimate and count, you can challenge them on car trips with rates and distances, etc etc etc. How many sides does a circle have?