Display being bright even on the lowest setting:

I wonder about rshifting the raster bytes...

i came from imaginary numbers which were extended to make quaternions.

i, j, k comes from FORTRAN's implicit types -- by default, names starting with I-N are integers and all other names are real.

this is much older ; Joseph Fourier was already using "i" and "j" for indices in the 1800s. See page 209: https://www.google.ca/books/edition/OEuvres_de_Fourier_Th%C3...

The context is i, j, k as indices in programs. No doubt FORTRAN was influenced by prior use such as you cite. But in no case does i used as an index come from i designating an imaginary number, which is what I aimed to refute.

Representing dimensions as indexable rows and columns of vectors or matrices was done on paper in the 1800s.

Pascal and Ada are Algol syntaxed relative to most languages.

Redis' author also made jimtcl, so I don't think the lack of a small engine was the gap

You're replying to Redis' author.

Please be clearer about this on the site!

The site is pretty clear: "Free and works in browser", "Processed locally", "Private". But apparently the site (sorry for the harsh word, but I can't interpret it any other way) lies.

"is incorrect" is slightly less harsh, but in this case, I'd call it a lie. It's a rather subtle but important implementation detail. I don't think the author (who is here in this thread) is necessarily malicious because of this, but, well, it's a lie.

This is why I only use agent mode on other people's computers

This is the way.

Perhaps we are witnessing a early shift toward ideographic writing

Interesting, I would make the exact opposite conclusion from the same data: if AI coding was that bad, we'd see more crapware.

> Model efficiency could improve faster than expected.

There are compounding incentives for this. I see this as the most likely outcome, though it will likely be stepwise rather than gradual.

Reminds me of all the dark fiber laid in the 1990s before DWDM made much of the laid fiber redundant.

If there is an AI bust, we will have a glut of surplus hardware.

The dark fiber glut wasn't caused by DWDM suddenly appearing out of nowhere.

The telcos saw DWDM coming -- they funded a lot of the research that created it. The breakthrough that made DWDM possible was patented in 1991, long before the start of the dotcom mania:

  https://patents.google.com/patent/US5159601

It was a straight up bubble -- the people digging those trenches really thought we'd need all that fiber even at dozens of wavelengths per strand.

They believed it because people kept showing them hockey-stick charts.

Google bought up all that dark fiber cheap a decade later and used it as the backbone of their network.

There's still a lot out there.

The problem is that the laid fiber can be useful for years while data center hardware degrades and becomes obsolete fast.

It could be a massive e-waste crisis.

Those GPUs don't just die after 2 years though, they will keep getting used since it's very likely their electricity costs will be low enough to still make it worth it. What's very dubious is if their value after 2/3 years will be enough to pay back the initial cost to buy them.

So it's more a crisis of investors wasting their money rather than ewaste.

For the analogy to fiber & DWDM to hold, we'd need some algorithmic breakthrough that makes current GPUs much faster / more efficient at running AI models. Something that makes the existing investment in hardware unneeded, even though the projected demand is real and continues to grow. IMNSHO that's not going to happen here. The foreseeable efficiency innovations are generally around reduced precision, which almost always require newer hardware to take advantage of. Impossible to rule out brilliant innovation, but I doubt it will happen like that.

And of course we might see an economic bubble burst for other reasons. That's possible again even if the demand continues to go up.

I think there are still innovations at that layer like the Addition is All You Need paper.