HN user

attentionmech

1 karma
Posts3
Comments49
View on HN

Will checkout jeremy's lectures. I actually use his fastbook notebooks a lot to self-study.

Karpathy's style, for me is more like at the right abstraction to bring out curiosity in me towards the subject. After watching his lectures, i go on to more materials generally, and never really stop there.

This is cool, and timely (I wanted a neat repo like that).

I have also been working from last 2 weeks on a gpt implementation in C. Eventually it turned out to be really slow (without CUDA). But it taught me how much memory management and data management there is when implementing these systems. You are running like a loop billions of times so you need to preallocate the computational graph and stuff. If anyone wanna check out it's ~1500 LOC single file:

https://github.com/attentionmech/gpt.c/blob/main/gpt.c

If you check failure section of their paper, they also tried other methods like MCTS and PRM which is what other labs have been obsessing about but couldn't move on from (that includes bigshots). Only team which I am aware which tried verifiable rewards is tulu but they didn't scaled it up and just left it there.

This sort of thing imo is similar to what openAI did with transformer architecture i.e. google invented it but couldn't scale it in the right direction and deepmind got busy with atari games. They had all the pieces still openai could do it. It seems to be it comes down to research leadership in what methods to choose to invest in. But yeah, the budgets big labs have, they can easily try 10 different techniques and brute force it all but seems like they are too opinionated in methods and less urgent on outcomes.

[paper] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.12948 [tulu] https://x.com/hamishivi/status/1881394117810500004

That's nice explanation. Is there any insights so far in the field about why chain of thought improves the capability of a model? Does it like provide model with more working memory or something in the context itself?

idk what i am doing but i am hooked on it. it's like as if it's directly interacting with dopamine of my brain.

They are currency of reputation and status. If you have enough stars, you get invited to private parties with elites. (I am just joking, they are bookmarks who got famous)

May be with these rules: - Per user account we only count one clone - We don't count anonymous clones

But I agree it's not like this is also without any issues

I think it's like a "upvote" thing which shows whether historically users have found the repo interesting. Even if you hide stars, there needs to be a way for the collective hivemind of github users to help each other with what repos are high quality or not right?

I think number of clones is a much better metric (it's like proof of work, it needs compute to clone a repo). For me starring a repo is liking bookmarking it, nothing else. They might as well just mark it as "Bookmarked" instead of "Starred".

I don't know you all but know that I love to read your thoughts on HN. I open it like 20 times a day. I enjoy that I am here with all of you to witness our existence together. and that includes AI bots. You are also part of our shared world now. I hope we will be kind to each other as far as it matters.