Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

So I think I've found another pretty incredible example of the generalisability of neural network potentials: this is a problem I've been dreaming of tackling for a decade but never felt I had the the tools to get at until now: How do potassium ion channels work. 1/n These...

95,100 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

As I sit here in DC this week, we are closer to something I was not sure I would ever see. I have been working in this industry since 2015. For most of those years, the defining feature of crypto in Washington was not policy. It was the absence of it. A gray zone where serious people built serious things under a constant cloud, never quite sure which rules applied or whether the ground would move beneath them. This week the CLARITY Act sits on the Senate calendar. A federal framework for digital asset market structure, the thing this industry has wanted for the better part of a decade, is closer than it has ever been. It is not law yet, and there are real hurdles left. But the distance between where we stood a few years ago and where we are sitting today is hard to put into words. I keep thinking about the work that got us here. Over the past year I watched Chainlink move from outside these conversations to inside them. Sergey at the White House for the signing of the GENIUS Act. The Department of Commerce putting government economic data onchain. Meetings with the SEC that became real interpretive guidance. Conversations with the lawmakers now writing the rules. None of that happens by accident. It happens because people keep showing up, year after year, and make the case in rooms where it is not yet obvious. And there is something fitting in it. The entire premise of what we build is verification. Making truth provable. Removing the question of what is real. The work here in DC is the same thing in a different form. Trading a decade of ambiguity for something the industry has never actually had. We are not at the finish line. But sitting here, it is hard not to feel the weight of it. The gray zone is ending. What comes next is something this industry has never had. Clarity.

Chris Barrett

14,798 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

HTML Artifacts are a big part of how I work with agents now. Artifacts can be more than just static files. When combined with agents, they can take action or help you take action. This unlocks all kinds of interesting ways to work with agents. This is clearly the future. Check out this writing and scheduler artifact I built in a few minutes. It uses a bit of HTML and JS. All the data is in markdown (Obsidian vaults), so the agent can access and modify it at any time. No DB needed. No sophisticated functionalities. The agent decides all that for me based on the skills, context, and memory it has access to. The best part about this simple stack is that all the important information stays with me. This has allowed me to build a recursive self-improving system and automations that can better tap into coding agents like Codex or Claude Code. I could have paid or built an entire app for scheduling posts, and there are so many of them out there. But I don't need to. I've realized a simple artifact does the job. And the simplicity of it is actually an advantage. Very little maintenance for very high returns on personalization, time, and efficiency. The other benefit of this is that I can add features as I please. That level of personalization feels magical, and we should all be pursuing more of it. All of this just keeps compounding. Of course, this example is just about writing. But I have similar artifacts for research, design, experimentation, evaluation, and so much more. And no, I didn't actually publish the post example I shared in the clip. It was just for demonstration purposes. I actually spend more time than this when writing together with agents. Lastly, having built my own agent orchestrator tool has made me realize that simplifying the tool stack is a superpower. If you are curious about how all this works, I will do a live session next week:

elvis

18,374 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

I had the same thought so I've been playing with it in nanochat. E.g. here's 8 agents (4 claude, 4 codex), with 1 GPU each running nanochat experiments (trying to delete logit softcap without regression). The TLDR is that it doesn't work and it's a mess... but it's still very pretty to look at :) I tried a few setups: 8 independent solo researchers, 1 chief scientist giving work to 8 junior researchers, etc. Each research program is a git branch, each scientist forks it into a feature branch, git worktrees for isolation, simple files for comms, skip Docker/VMs for simplicity atm (I find that instructions are enough to prevent interference). Research org runs in tmux window grids of interactive sessions (like Teams) so that it's pretty to look at, see their individual work, and "take over" if needed, i.e. no -p. But ok the reason it doesn't work so far is that the agents' ideas are just pretty bad out of the box, even at highest intelligence. They don't think carefully though experiment design, they run a bit non-sensical variations, they don't create strong baselines and ablate things properly, they don't carefully control for runtime or flops. (just as an example, an agent yesterday "discovered" that increasing the hidden size of the network improves the validation loss, which is a totally spurious result given that a bigger network will have a lower validation loss in the infinite data regime, but then it also trains for a lot longer, it's not clear why I had to come in to point that out). They are very good at implementing any given well-scoped and described idea but they don't creatively generate them. But the goal is that you are now programming an organization (e.g. a "research org") and its individual agents, so the "source code" is the collection of prompts, skills, tools, etc. and processes that make it up. E.g. a daily standup in the morning is now part of the "org code". And optimizing nanochat pretraining is just one of the many tasks (almost like an eval). Then - given an arbitrary task, how quickly does your research org generate progress on it?

Andrej Karpathy

1,642,140 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten