Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Reame – a CPU inference server that gets faster as it runs

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–28 of 28 posts

Re: Show HN: Reame – a CPU inference server that gets faster as it runs

#22

Post by GTP »

derac wrote: post #16
GTP wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can actually get more. You have an amount of resources for ARM servers, if you allocate all of that to a single one you ger 24GB RAM and 4 vCPU.

This was reduced recently to 2/12. It's also next to impossible to allocate the free stuff unless you put in a CC. If you do, you get the servers right away, though. Just be careful not to spend. You can set up a budget trigger to shut down the vms. Old servers may have been grandfathered, but mine was set to 1/1 and couldn't be reshaped.

I logged in to double-check if I was going to pay for my beefy ARM server. There was a notification about this change, but looking into the billing section, I saw no change. I have an alert in place if I pay more than 5€ per month, so for now I'm leaving my server as is.

Re: Show HN: Reame – a CPU inference server that gets faster as it runs

#24

Post by tripzilch »

targetbridge wrote: post #17
ComputerGuru wrote: post #13

Seems the entire repo and documentation is all ai-generated?

Yes, I use AI to help me build and write docs — solo dev, I'd be stupid not to. The benchmarks are real though: free Oracle ARM box, my laptop, a cheap VPS. I ran them all myself, including the ones that went badly (they're in the README too).

But if you didn't care enough to write the docs yourself, why are you submitting it for discussion?

Are you seriously expecting humans to spend their time and effort and discuss your AI written docs that you literally admit you'd be "stupid" to have spent effort on yourself?

That's really condescending of you.

Re: Show HN: Reame – a CPU inference server that gets faster as it runs

#26

Post by targetbridge »

tripzilch wrote: post #24
targetbridge wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I use AI to help me build and write docs — solo dev, I'd be stupid not to. The benchmarks are real though: free Oracle ARM box, my laptop, a cheap VPS. I ran them all myself, including the ones that went badly (they're in the README too).

But if you didn't care enough to write the docs yourself, why are you submitting it for discussion? Are you seriously expecting humans to spend their time and effort and discuss your AI written docs that you literally admit you'd be "stupid" to have spent effort on yourself? That's really condescending of you.

It seems pointless to me to stir up conflict or engage in unnecessary arguments; I have simply expressed my personal view—namely, that I value the utility of artificial intelligence, which I sometimes use to kickstart new projects (projects that can certainly be supplemented with different types of input in the future). I believe this is an innovative, open-minded, and forward-looking approach. If you disagree, you are free to hold your opinion, but I do not share it.

For what it's worth: the feedback in this thread found three real bugs that were fixed, tested and shipped within 24 hours — that's the part of the discussion I care about.

Re: Show HN: Reame – a CPU inference server that gets faster as it runs

#27

Post by tripzilch »

targetbridge wrote: post #26
tripzilch wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you didn't care enough to write the docs yourself, why are you submitting it for discussion? Are you seriously expecting humans to spend their time and effort and discuss your AI written docs that you literally admit you'd be "stupid" to have spent effort on yourself? That's really condescending of you.

It seems pointless to me to stir up conflict or engage in unnecessary arguments; I have simply expressed my personal view—namely, that I value the utility of artificial intelligence, which I sometimes use to kickstart new projects (projects that can certainly be supplemented with different types of input in the future). I believe this is an innovative, open-minded, and forward-looking approach. If you disagree, you a…

"For what it's worth" ? Yeah for what it's worth to you, you mean.

You submitted and expected people to read an article that you say you would have been stupid to write yourself, that's quite condescending, and just because you got something worth your while out of that doesn't really make it okay.

Post reply on HN