jpcompartir

That is not a disclaimer for generated code, it's referring to the code that generated the simulations/plots.

I had read that line before I commented, it was partly what sparked me to comment as it was a clear place for a disclaimer.

Agree here - in a nutshell it strikes me as intellectually dishonest to intentionally pass off some other entity's work as one's own.

Edit: OP confirms there's no AI-generated code, so do ignore me.

The code style - and in particular the *comments - indicate most of the code was written by AI. My apologies if you are not trying to hide this fact, but it seems like common decency to label that you're heavily using AI?

*Comments like this: "# Anonymous function"

Yes, they are not a private tutor, and they do not claim to be. That is just the market they are going after.

They believe they can help people reach better outcomes for less. Whether they're correct or not is another question.

I believe their rationale is that a private tutor costs more than this per lesson, and they're targeting the people who will pay for a tutor once/twice a week for themselves or their children.

I tend to agree with you, it seems like they could be wayyy more competitive on price but I also understand where they're coming from.

This is an extremely welcome move in a good direction from OpenAI. I can only thank them for all of the extra work around the models - Harmony structure, metal/torch/triton implementations, inference guides, cookbooks & fine-tuning/reinforcement learning scripts, datasets etc.

There is an insane amount of helpful information buried in this release

Most reasoned take is directly from the paper itself:

"We strongly emphasize that this paper is largely a pedagogical exercise, with interesting discoveries and strange serendipities, worthy of a record in the scientific literature. By far the most likely outcome will be that 3I/ATLAS is a completely natural interstellar object, probably a comet, and the authors await the astronomical data to support this likely origin."

This is a nonsense critique.

Modest results are worth publishing, as are bad results.

It seems more like Open Source devs who are looking to build clout/rep with MLX?

Pretty sure Claude Sonnet is actually doing most of the work.

Good question, I was wondering the same.

My hunch would be that even if we had a lot more annotated examples of reasoning and retrieval over 10,000+ tokens, the architectures we have today would still be limited.

Spot on.

I don't mean to be ungenerous, just pointing out a very small detail the author may not have been aware of.

I agree with your reading of the Wikipedia article, which I take to mean that they moved first to somewhere else in Devon, and then ended up in Teignmouth.

The re-wording is slightly less precise and does not offer more information.

It is re-written in the article as: "In his earliest life, he and his mother moved in with an aunt in Devon, then to Teignmouth, and then finally to Bracknell on account of wartime bombings."

As I said, it really is only a small detail - and completely forgivable as I'm sure many people have no idea where Teignmouth, or even Devon is. However, on current reading it would be akin to saying "moved from England to London"

Just a small detail, but Teignmouth is in Devon, i.e. the family didn't move from Devon to Teignmouth.

Assuming the snippet in the article was from Wikipedia, where it says: "He and his mother left London for safety to stay with an aunt in Devon, where they eventually moved to Teignmouth."

It means to say that they eventually moved to Teignmouth, Devon.