That's a monkey's paw desire because nowhere is Hyrum's law more true than programming languages. Alternatively you just end up with something like C++ where no one understands the whole thing.
The somewhat abbreviated answer is that the "state" is formalized into the concept of fields. All the physical properties we can observe are from coupling with the relevant fields. The speed at which changes can propagate in fields is C, hence the speed of light being the same value.
Programming skill is similar to driving skill. You can hire the best people in the world and there'll still be incidents. The people who are most skilled may even be more incident-prone because they have the skills to take more risks.
Don't bet the company on no one ever making a mistake. Set up a system where the unintentional risks are minimized and the consequences of inevitable failures are mitigated by seatbelts and insurance policies.
If you're manually calling malloc in Rust, your code is almost certainly wrong. It might be called as an implementation detail when you create new objects, but std can generally be used as if it were managed automatically.
The problem is that Meta jumped headfirst into the circular financing of datacenter build out, so they're just as screwed if the infrastructure becomes less valuable.
So take 16 independent computers and have them each solve the problem separately. You'd still be saving 80% compared to the paper's benchmarks. It wasn't close.
McSherry does a lot of interesting work on making monotonic/incremental distributed systems efficient (e.g. Differential and Timely Dataflow). Those kinds of systems scale much more linearly.
I would be pissed if my programming language changed as quickly as Claude code does. Languages need to move slowly and carefully, and zig is on the faster end of language development regardless.
User numbers aren't the only factor. Microsoft has a much larger presence in commercial email than Apple. I suspect an outbound email from a personal provider is far more likely to be destined for an outlook inbox than one on iCloud.
They're not the newest kind of literature. Arthurian legends and religious canons are two examples of newer forms, neither of which I think would be typically described as "recent." I could also use the novella, and the anecdote as examples instead.
There are many, many factories that still don't have internet access on the floor, and commercial inference generally has response latencies measured in seconds. I struggle to imagine a factory spending hundreds of thousands for the local compute to run a large model either, given how cheap they are about expenses.
I'm also skeptical that you can cleanly differentiate between "safety critical actions" and "actions", though this is less of a practical concern given how laissez-faire some manufacturers are. For context, I work on safety critical robotics (in automotive).
By what standard are novels "recent"? The earliest novels we have originated not long after the first books (aka codices) appeared. The first modern novel was written at the same time as the king james bible, over 400 years ago.
Unfortunately there really aren't any other books like the culture series. You might enjoy Banks' "The Algebraist" and the completely unrelated though similarly named "The Alchemist".
No one says "I gave up on eating because restaurants kept serving me spicy food". You just order different food. A short story that's a couple pages long isn't going to waste them describing the color of buttons, and not every novelist is Tolkien.
As a follow-up to this comment, I sat down and implemented a better method myself, then looked at the specification code to discover they did exactly the same thing.
It really should have been defined in terms of fixed point like HAWK was. Supposedly you'd need a large number of bits for it, but I'm not sure I find that argument particularly convincing given that floats are a kind of fixed point in log space, with a bunch of asterisks that don't help falcon much.
You don't have to assume that. We can take each randomly oriented noodle and orient it correctly in O(1) as a preprocessing step. Since the complexity would be additive, the overall complexity remains O(N).
In a water cooler channel, while the CEO was calling in from his NBA team headquarters to announce layoffs...
It's mildly dramatized, bordering on milquetoast satire of exactly what he was doing.