Isaac Yonemoto is cooking retweeted
I've come to believe that it's a lack of self-reflection, not being conniving or manipulative, that makes someone a bad person.
Everyone engages in occasional behavior that is harmful. A "good person" takes that feedback to heart, takes responsibility for their actions, and tries to do better next time. A "bad person" pushes the thought away and refuses to reflect on their behavior.
Over time, doing that repeatedly - refusing to be morally accountable - is what makes someone a bad person. It doesn't mean they don't have the capacity for redemption, but it's impossible to collaborate with people who refuse to learn from iterated moral games.
Today the #elixirlang typechecker found an inefficiency in a jsonschema, and the LLM indeed fixed it by tightening the jsonschema. 😳
My fun side project proof checker was useful for understanding the OpenAI proof withdrawal:
github.com/ityonemo/openai-w…
xitter.cf/bcardarella/status/210…
Someone should take him up on this wager. The first commit for rust was slower than the first commit for elixir (in some of the benchmarks)
unavailable
Isaac Yonemoto is cooking retweeted
I'm fluent in DHHese. Let me translate:
"the benchmark I posted was completely fucked up. I tried arguing it's measuring agent performance instead of language performance but these duckers found out I spent more time on the rust version. stop calling me out on it. how about some free labour to fix the shittiest benchmark on earth? but also realise you are still wrong and I'm right, although it's hard to say what I'm right about exactly - I've run out of lies and misdirections a while ago"
Replying to @crertel
I didn't do anything. I asked two frontier agents to make the most of Elixir and this is what they came up with. Please do send a PR to speed things up! But also realize that it's not exactly extra points for Elixir if frontier agents can't find the magic "go fast" switches.
Claude was not brave enough to prove Cayley's theorem without me literally saying "you can do it kiddo"
Isaac Yonemoto is cooking retweeted
So... it turns out that benchmark is not apples to apples @dhh
Rust's first port from Ruby: 4.4× Rails. Elixir's: 3.3×.
Then Rust got 398 commits and 18 perf PRs. Go was ported from that tuned Rust.
Elixir got one small tuning pass. The rest got none of that love.
Fair? 🤔
I've had agents implement and optimize the Campfire web app in Elixir, Go, and Rust. Yes, Ruby is the slowest. I didn't care about that when the pay-off was huge in terms of productivity and developer joy. But if you're no longer reading the code? github.com/basecamp/once-cam…
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
The shown benchmarks use non-equivalent implementations: Elixir routes all DB queries through a single GenServer with Redis for jobs (retained from Rails), while Rust uses in-process queues, omits CSRF tags/fields, and applies other caching changes.
github.com/basecamp/once-…
raw.githubusercontent.com/basecamp/once-…
github.com/basecamp/once-…
github.com/basecamp/once-…
x.com/zachsdaniel1/s…
It's not next token prediction, it's next token picking. That's where the spark of consciousness lies. Einstein was wrong. The hand of God does indeed play dice.
Isaac Yonemoto is cooking retweeted
Some of the greatest biological theories of all time predicted not only the existence of a "thing" -- like an ion channel -- but how *entire* biological mechanisms worked. They did so, in some cases, before any direct experimental evidence supported the ideas.
Two of these theories, the chemiosmotic theory and the clonal selection theory of adaptive immunity, correctly predicted how cells generate energy to power themselves and how the body mounts a defense against pathogens, respectively, before any pre-existing analogs were known.
How did these "great leaps" in imagination come about? In our latest @AsimovPress article, the talented @ulkar_aghayeva tells their story.
Chemiosmotic theory traces back to Peter Mitchell, a British biochemist who formulated his ideas without “a shred of experimental evidence.” Mitchell was directly inspired by the pre-Socratic philosopher, Heraclitus of Ephesus, who wrote about flux and change and directly informed how Mitchell thought about ions moving through a membrane.
The clonal selection theory stems from Niels Jerne, who attributed his great leap in imagination to (oddly enough) the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard. In a 1966 paper, Jerne explained how he began thinking about antibody formation, writing:
"Can the truth (the capability to synthesize an antibody) be learned? If so, it must be assumed not to pre-exist; to be learned, it must be acquired. We are thus confronted with the difficulty to which Socrates calls attention in Meno (Socrates, 375 B.C.), namely that it makes as little sense to search for what one does not know as to search for what one knows; what one knows one cannot search for, since one knows it already, and what one does not know one cannot search for, since one does not even know what to search for. Socrates resolved this difficulty by postulating that learning is nothing but recollection. The truth (the capability to synthesize an antibody) cannot be brought in, but was already inherent."
The article is interesting throughout. It's inspiring to study how scientists made their big discoveries, even in the face of *extreme* resistance. (Mitchell, for instance, left academia in 1963 and set up his own research organization to continue his work. He won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1978, vindicated.)
press.asimov.com/articles/gr…
LFG













