There was a library for Rust called “faster” which worked similarly to Rayon, but for SIMD.
The simpleminded way to do what you’re saying would be to have the compiler create separate PTX and native versions of a Rayon structure, and then choose which to invoke at runtime.
2. In practice, the risk of introducing a breakage probably makes upstream averse to refactoring for aesthetics alone; you’d need to prove that there’s a functional bug. But of course, you’re less likely to notice a functional bug if the aesthetic is so bad you can’t follow the code. And when people need a new feature, that will get shoehorned in while changing as little code as possible, because nobody fully understands why everything is there. Especially when execution speed is a potential attack vector.
So maybe shades of the trolley problem too - people would rather passively let multiple bugs exist, than be actively responsible for introducing one.
It reminds me of Google Dart, which was originally pitched as an alternate language that enabled web programming in the style Google likes (strong types etc.). There was a loud cry of scope creep from implementors and undo market influence in places like Hacker News. It was so poorly received that Google rescinded the proposal to make it a peer language to JavaScript.
Granted, the interests point in different directions for security software v.s. a mainstream platform. Still, audiences are quick to question the motives of companies that have the scale to invest in something like making a net-new security runtime.
Pointless nitpick, but you want "undue market influence." "Undo market influence" is what the FTC orders when they decide there's monopolistic practices going on.
> It is the first model to get partial-credit on an LLM image test I have. Which is counting the legs of a dog. Specifically, a dog with 5 legs. This is a wild test, because LLMs get really pushy and insistent that the dog only has 4 legs.
I wonder if “How many legs do you see?” is close enough to “How many lights do you see?” that the LLMs are responding based on the memes surrounding the Star Trek episode “Chain of Command”.
I started with desktop applications, so my go-to for GUI has been Qt, especially QML. It works on Windows / MacOS / Linux as well as iOS and Android. I think there’s now a way to compile QML to webassembly as well. It also has a ton of support classes that are loosely analogous to the various *Kit things supplied on iOS and Android.
The downside is that the core of Qt is in C++, so it’s mostly seen (or used for?) embedded contexts.
I recently used Slint as well, which isn’t anywhere near as mature, but is at least written in Rust and has some type-safety benefits.
SwiftUI is pretty good too, and I wish I got to work on Apple platforms more.
To me, the simplicity of creating a “Button” when you want a button makes more sense, instead of a React component that’s a div styled by layers of CSS and brought to life by JavaScript.
But I’m kind of bummed that I started with that route (well, and writing partial UI systems for game / media engines a few times) because most people learned web apps and the DOM, and it’s made it harder to get the kind of work I identify with.
So it’s hard for me to recommend Qt due to the career implications…but at the same for the projects I’ve worked on, it’s made a smaller amount of work go a longer way with a more native feel than electron apps seem to have.
Yes. And everyone is glossing over the benefit of unified memory for LLM applications. Apple may not have the models, but it has customer goodwill, a platform, and the logistical infrastructure to roll them out. It probably even has the cash to buy some AI companies outright; maybe not the big ones (for a reasonable amount, anyway) but small to midsize ones with domain-specific models that could be combined.
Not to mention the “default browser” leverage it has with with iPhones, iPods, and watches.
Unified memory and examples like the M1 Ultra still being able to hold it's own years later might be one of the things that not all Mac users and non-mac users alike have experienced.
It's nice to see 16 Gb becoming the minimum, to me it should have been 32 for a long time.
Slint does not use a browser. Instead, it has its own runtime written in rust and uses a custom DSL to describe the UI.
It has API for different programming language.
For Javascript, it uses node or deno for the application logic, and then spawn the UI with its own runtime without the browser.
In a way it is the opposite which took the JS runtime out of electron to replace it with a Rust API, while Slint keeps the JS runtime but swaps the browser for its own runtime (for the JS dev point of view)
Whose interests corporations act in is not arbitrary, it’s tied to how they make money.
Meta and Google make their money primarily from advertisers, Apple makes money from consumers buying iPhones. One of the upsides to paying for something is that the company is incentivized to keep you paying or get you to pay more.
Something I remind people who buy cheaper Android phones and then complain about ads - the OS development is being subsidized by those ads. From Google’s perspective, securing their revenue stream is the justification for Chrome and Android’s existence. It’s not a purely altruistic move to fund their open source development.
Charts of the revenue stream for some major tech companies:
The simpleminded way to do what you’re saying would be to have the compiler create separate PTX and native versions of a Rayon structure, and then choose which to invoke at runtime.
reply