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

Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

localai.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 63 posts

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#21

Post by bendmorris »

altmanaltman wrote: post #17
nnevatie wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post is full of signs. Here's only a couple of examples: > The method, the measurements, and what it costs us. > That is the general shape of these wins. > Parity is the gate, speed is the follow-up I could go on and on, but you probably get the point. If you don't find anything funny with the above, you might have not been enough-exposed to slop.

What do you mean you could go on and on? Why do you think those sentences are AI written. And okay, your second argument is that I just don't know slop because I am not exposed to it? But you don't know anything about me or what I am exposed. You're just making random claims and stating they are correct without any evidence or arguments.

What kind of evidence do you expect beyond "random claims" here?

This post is incredibly obviously AI generated, to the extent that I doubt a human author edited it at all. Not "written with AI assistance" but full on "give Claude some bullets and hit publish." It contains tons of tropes that show up in all AI writing and which people are highlighting here.

What would convince you of that?

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#22

Post by layer8 »

interpol_p wrote: post #20
lelanthran wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should have started with writing your own blog posts. While the page looks vibe-coded[1], the content itself does not have any AI tells. What are the tells you are seeing? [1] Too many sites I find on HN frontpage these days slow my PC to a crawl. I assume they are all using the same autogenerated HTML, Javascrip and CSS to make animated backgrounds :-( On this specific site scrolling is laggy.

I stopped reading almost immediately. The stylistic choices in the writing just felt like LLM to me. Examples: "depth estimation that beats PyTorch on CPU in half the memory" — "…beats X in Y…" "Most LocalAI backends wrap somebody else’s engine, and that is the right default." — "…and that is the right" "MLX and the rest are maintained by people who are better at those models than we are" — "better at those models th…

Also, “honest reading” — without any context explaining why one would contemplate a dishonest reading.

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#23

Post by lelanthran »

interpol_p wrote: post #20
lelanthran wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should have started with writing your own blog posts. While the page looks vibe-coded[1], the content itself does not have any AI tells. What are the tells you are seeing? [1] Too many sites I find on HN frontpage these days slow my PC to a crawl. I assume they are all using the same autogenerated HTML, Javascrip and CSS to make animated backgrounds :-( On this specific site scrolling is laggy.

I stopped reading almost immediately. The stylistic choices in the writing just felt like LLM to me. Examples: "depth estimation that beats PyTorch on CPU in half the memory" — "…beats X in Y…" "Most LocalAI backends wrap somebody else’s engine, and that is the right default." — "…and that is the right" "MLX and the rest are maintained by people who are better at those models than we are" — "better at those models th…

Now that you point it out, there are quite a few tells, still not as many as most of the slop that gets posted here.

I think it's because of the laggy scrolling that I didn't read the whole thing anyway, just the first few screens.

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#24

Post by xienze »

pjmlp wrote: post #16
stephbook wrote: post #3

Should have started with writing your own blog posts.

Same could be said for all that talk about having Claude do their work.

I've had this debate before on HN. The excuses are generally "well it can write better code than most developers, but an LLM can't write better prose than most people" (I strongly disagree with this) and, what I think is at the heart of the matter, "text is for the reader to read directly, code is hidden." Or in other words, "as long as I can't tell it's AI, it's fine."

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#25

Post by MattPalmer1086 »

interpol_p wrote: post #20
lelanthran wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should have started with writing your own blog posts. While the page looks vibe-coded[1], the content itself does not have any AI tells. What are the tells you are seeing? [1] Too many sites I find on HN frontpage these days slow my PC to a crawl. I assume they are all using the same autogenerated HTML, Javascrip and CSS to make animated backgrounds :-( On this specific site scrolling is laggy.

I stopped reading almost immediately. The stylistic choices in the writing just felt like LLM to me. Examples: "depth estimation that beats PyTorch on CPU in half the memory" — "…beats X in Y…" "Most LocalAI backends wrap somebody else’s engine, and that is the right default." — "…and that is the right" "MLX and the rest are maintained by people who are better at those models than we are" — "better at those models th…

For me, it's that AI writing is always trying to be clever for every single point it makes (and constantly uses the same language patterns when doing so).

Its like listening to an insufferable clever dick, who is not as bright as they think they are. You would also find it incredibly irritating if a human talked like that

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#27

Post by skavi »

altmanaltman wrote: post #17
nnevatie wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post is full of signs. Here's only a couple of examples: > The method, the measurements, and what it costs us. > That is the general shape of these wins. > Parity is the gate, speed is the follow-up I could go on and on, but you probably get the point. If you don't find anything funny with the above, you might have not been enough-exposed to slop.

What do you mean you could go on and on? Why do you think those sentences are AI written. And okay, your second argument is that I just don't know slop because I am not exposed to it? But you don't know anything about me or what I am exposed. You're just making random claims and stating they are correct without any evidence or arguments.

https://www.pangram.com/history/125358dc-9f80-4fe2-8540-85a9...

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#28

Post by nnevatie »

interpol_p wrote: post #20
lelanthran wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should have started with writing your own blog posts. While the page looks vibe-coded[1], the content itself does not have any AI tells. What are the tells you are seeing? [1] Too many sites I find on HN frontpage these days slow my PC to a crawl. I assume they are all using the same autogenerated HTML, Javascrip and CSS to make animated backgrounds :-( On this specific site scrolling is laggy.

I stopped reading almost immediately. The stylistic choices in the writing just felt like LLM to me. Examples: "depth estimation that beats PyTorch on CPU in half the memory" — "…beats X in Y…" "Most LocalAI backends wrap somebody else’s engine, and that is the right default." — "…and that is the right" "MLX and the rest are maintained by people who are better at those models than we are" — "better at those models th…

[dead]

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#29

Post by nnevatie »

xienze wrote: post #24
pjmlp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same could be said for all that talk about having Claude do their work.

I've had this debate before on HN. The excuses are generally "well it can write better code than most developers, but an LLM can't write better prose than most people" (I strongly disagree with this) and, what I think is at the heart of the matter, "text is for the reader to read directly, code is hidden." Or in other words, "as long as I can't tell it's AI, it's fine."

I would rather read faulty English, succinct sentences and getting to the point, than the generic filler LLMs produce.

Re: Why we write our own C and C++ inference engines

#30

Post by PatronBernard »

interpol_p wrote: post #20
lelanthran wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should have started with writing your own blog posts. While the page looks vibe-coded[1], the content itself does not have any AI tells. What are the tells you are seeing? [1] Too many sites I find on HN frontpage these days slow my PC to a crawl. I assume they are all using the same autogenerated HTML, Javascrip and CSS to make animated backgrounds :-( On this specific site scrolling is laggy.

I stopped reading almost immediately. The stylistic choices in the writing just felt like LLM to me. Examples: "depth estimation that beats PyTorch on CPU in half the memory" — "…beats X in Y…" "Most LocalAI backends wrap somebody else’s engine, and that is the right default." — "…and that is the right" "MLX and the rest are maintained by people who are better at those models than we are" — "better at those models th…

Why are you using an em-dash though?
Post reply on HN