Mike Larkin retweeted
Congratulations to the @openbsd team on their 8.0 release!
Looks like 8.0 received tons of improvements to multiple hardware architectures, expanded and improved hibernate support, and a boatload of fixes.
Keep up the excellent work, OpenBSD!
openbsd.org/80.html
Mike Larkin retweeted
#OpenBSD: When You Update Your Production System Before Your First Cup of Coffee! 8.0 is huge!
Mike Larkin retweeted
Let me show you how ridiculous the amount of computation inside a modern AI model actually is.
This is Qwen3.8-27B answering one of the easiest questions imaginable:
“What is the capital of France?”
Thinking is disabled.
The requested response is one word.
Paris.
But the GPU still has to perform an enormous amount of numerical computation before those four letters appear.
The visualization shows individual mathematical operations from the model’s actual computation. Each frame represents only a tiny slice of what is happening inside the network.
And here’s the part that completely changes how you see the video:
Between the frames, roughly 7.2 million operations are being skipped.
The complete inference for that single-word answer involved an estimated 25.8 billion numerical operations.
The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell completed the computation in roughly 13 milliseconds.
That’s 0.013 seconds.
At 60 frames per second, if you tried to visualize every operation one by one, you’d need more than 13 years of video to represent what the GPU processed in those few milliseconds.
The visualization you’re watching is therefore massively slowed down compared with the actual computation.
The GPU is effectively doing in milliseconds what would take years to display at human-friendly speed.
And remember, this is a 27B parameter model answering a trivial question with thinking turned off.
Now scale the idea up.
Hundreds of billions of parameters.
Longer context windows.
Multiple reasoning steps.
Tool calls.
Image and video inputs.
Thousands of concurrent users.
Suddenly the enormous compute requirements of AI don’t seem quite so mysterious.
A language model isn’t sitting there “thinking” in the human sense.
It’s executing an absurd number of numerical operations across billions of learned parameters, moving data through layers, calculating activations, and repeatedly predicting what should come next.
And all of that happens before you see something as simple as:
“Paris.”
That’s why GPU hardware is so ridiculous.
Whether you’re running a giant datacenter accelerator or squeezing a local model onto an old consumer GPU, you’re watching silicon perform billions of calculations at a speed that is basically impossible for humans to intuit.
We see one word.
The GPU sees billions of operations.
Appreciate your GPU.
They’re genuinely insane pieces of engineering.
Mike Larkin retweeted
This is why Omarchy Linux was needed: The anti-AI stance of many Linux projects, which is closely connected to their political views, is becoming a real problem and hinders progress.
Omarchy is completely free of such inhibitions and embraces AI.
Flathub (a Linux app “store” for Flatpak, heavily used by GNOME), is actively rejecting software made with AI assistance. Calls any AI influenced code “tainted”.
“We see [using AI at all] as a liability (no matter how much people swear they review)”.
“As long as your development and codebase rely on [AI], then it’s not super bueno.”
Mike Larkin retweeted
Dusting off this tweet from April because this gap in shared understanding of LLM capability is *widening*. It's now less "two groups of people speaking past each other" and more a sharp funnel.
- Napkin math somewhere around 6B people (~75% of the population) have barely come in contact with LLMs at all.
- Around 1-2B (~20%) are casual and infrequent users of free-tier ChatGPT-like products. This group sees derpy chatbots and treats them a bit like a better Google search, a writing aid, or etc. Maybe an agent tries to book you a flight. I have non-tech friends who (reasonably, imo) say they have not much use for it at all. Even many professionals outside of math&code are in this tier. For example, execs and many other functions spend a lot of their time talking to other people, so while they understand what is happening intellectually, it is still second-hand and a bit abstract.
- Now we get to professional use of frontier-grade LLMs in math&code. Somewhere around 20M people (0.2%) see first-hand that large, complex projects that used to take them weeks/months can now be completed by agents with a prompt. Building apps, copying apps, translating apps, decompiling apps from binaries... This has all happened very quickly and recently - less than 1 year ago, I was writing code manually by hand, typing memorized computer code commands into a code editor character by character, occasionally pressing Tab to autocomplete a little chunk of code.
- And finally we get to the ~5,000 people (~0.00006%) with access to frontier-grade systems internally. The external world has seen the preview. It looks like swarms of thousands of agents collaborating over weeks on software mega projects: minting zero days, running cyber attacks and defenses at machine speeds, discovering new science, advancing the frontier of mathematics. Things that would have taken top professionals in the industry years of work. Meanwhile, human review and comprehension are starting to fall behind. For example, people are still involved in the "archeology" of the OpenAI-HF incident from many months ago. Mathematicians may be poring over the 722 manuscripts on frontier mathematics for a while.
The funnel is driven by a combination of factors:
1. The impact scales with ambition, problem size, and horizon. A question with a paragraph answer barely stresses the system. You need a reservoir of big, difficult problems that you really care about. This aspect drives the consumer / professional dimension of the funnel.
2. The jaggedness of the system (which I have written about a lot separately). Capability peaks in domains that are digital, verifiable and economically valuable. This is because LLM capability emerges from reinforcement learning on verifiable rewards on a curated environment mixture driven by revenue potential. This aspect primarily drives the area (e.g. math&code) dimension of the funnel.
3. Access. Free-tier, paid-tier, internal.
So this is the weirdness of the moment. The general public has mostly not interacted with these systems. When they have, it looks like a derpy chatbot. The majority of professionals still see only a modest uplift. And a small sliver of professionals are experiencing the vertigo of the curve going vertical. And it is all happening at the same time.
Judging by my tl there is a growing gap in understanding of AI capability.
The first issue I think is around recency and tier of use. I think a lot of people tried the free tier of ChatGPT somewhere last year and allowed it to inform their views on AI a little too much. This is a group of reactions laughing at various quirks of the models, hallucinations, etc. Yes I also saw the viral videos of OpenAI's Advanced Voice mode fumbling simple queries like "should I drive or walk to the carwash". The thing is that these free and old/deprecated models don't reflect the capability in the latest round of state of the art agentic models of this year, especially OpenAI Codex and Claude Code.
But that brings me to the second issue. Even if people paid $200/month to use the state of the art models, a lot of the capabilities are relatively "peaky" in highly technical areas. Typical queries around search, writing, advice, etc. are *not* the domain that has made the most noticeable and dramatic strides in capability. Partly, this is due to the technical details of reinforcement learning and its use of verifiable rewards. But partly, it's also because these use cases are not sufficiently prioritized by the companies in their hillclimbing because they don't lead to as much $$$ value. The goldmines are elsewhere, and the focus comes along.
So that brings me to the second group of people, who *both* 1) pay for and use the state of the art frontier agentic models (OpenAI Codex / Claude Code) and 2) do so professionally in technical domains like programming, math and research. This group of people is subject to the highest amount of "AI Psychosis" because the recent improvements in these domains as of this year have been nothing short of staggering. When you hand a computer terminal to one of these models, you can now watch them melt programming problems that you'd normally expect to take days/weeks of work. It's this second group of people that assigns a much greater gravity to the capabilities, their slope, and various cyber-related repercussions.
TLDR the people in these two groups are speaking past each other. It really is simultaneously the case that OpenAI's free and I think slightly orphaned (?) "Advanced Voice Mode" will fumble the dumbest questions in your Instagram's reels and *at the same time*, OpenAI's highest-tier and paid Codex model will go off for 1 hour to coherently restructure an entire code base, or find and exploit vulnerabilities in computer systems. This part really works and has made dramatic strides because 2 properties: 1) these domains offer explicit reward functions that are verifiable meaning they are easily amenable to reinforcement learning training (e.g. unit tests passed yes or no, in contrast to writing, which is much harder to explicitly judge), but also 2) they are a lot more valuable in b2b settings, meaning that the biggest fraction of the team is focused on improving them. So here we are.
Mike Larkin retweeted
Mahomes Mafia Vs Las Vegas Raiders. Probably one of my best projects yet. I had fun with this one I hope y’all enjoy. #chiefs #cowboys #patrickmahomes
Thrilled to welcome @spacexai as a Founding Corporate Patron for the Omacom Foundation. That's $1,500,000 in @grok tokens for the maintenance and development of Omarchy. Maybe soon they'll be beamed straight from orbit? Let's go 🚀🌕 omarchy.org/news/2026/10/spa…
Mike Larkin retweeted
Replying to @marcusabramovi1
Indeed.
Imagine telling everyone you are solving problems to help humanity, then someone invents solving machine, and then you're like "actually we don't give a fuck about humanity. These puzzles are entrance tickets into an exclusive club we gatekeep. Please don't solve these puzzles. There is a finite number, and we need them for our game."
Mike Larkin retweeted
As a math researcher, I do not respect this association. Get rekt, losers.
Important statement from the Association for Human Mathematics
ahmath.org/statements
Mike Larkin retweeted
"Mathematicians did not ask for this work to be done" might become one of the historical quotes from this era, perfectly depicting the downfall of academia
Mike Larkin retweeted
Quasi-RH?!?!???! Are you kidding me? If a human did this, it would be an instant Fields Medal, no questions asked.
RH says zeta has no zeros in Re(s)>1/2. The best we had until a second ago was a region that got thinner and thinner the higher up the imaginary axis you go. I thought maybe they’d fatten that up a bit, that’d be a massive breakthrough. But no. They got a zero free strip!!!! Insane
We’re releasing a broad range of new mathematical results produced by an internal frontier model.
We’ve been consulting with the independent Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence at the Institute for Advanced Study, and we have drawn on their advice and public recommendations to inform how we release these results.
github.com/openai/math
Replying to @mlarkin2012 @TheAhmadOsman
Furthermore, critical hardware features remain unsupported even across the M1 and M2 generations.
Mike Larkin retweeted
Wow 🤯 I left Opus 5.5 on overnight to decompile the Linux kernel and came back to the full source code available
In the future all software will be open source 🚀
Mike Larkin retweeted
We'll be spending a lot more time trying to understand the outputs of language models. A few thoughts, tips & tricks:
Writing. Something I've had success with: Ask your LLM to explain something in ASD-STE100, it's a controlled language specification originally developed for aerospace maintenance documentation. LLMs well-versed in this language and it comes with heavy constraints on clean writing style that I often find a lot more readable. Sometimes I've tried to soften it a bit e.g. ask for "80% of the way to ASD-STE100" because the spec is quite stringent. But even better:
Diagrams / images. Instead of writing, ask your LLM to create a diagram. These can be a lot easier to process, parse, and understand. But even better:
Web pages. Ask for output "in HTML" to get a beautiful, interactive webpage. LLMs are getting really good at frontend and can create beautiful experiences, animations, etc. But even better:
Explainer videos. The output format I am most bullish on is fully custom / bespoke explainer videos generated on any arbitrary topic. Experiment with things like "Create a 3b1b style video explainer on X. Use my ElevenLabs API key for audio narration". (you'd need an API key for the latter or you can ask your LLM to find you decent free alternatives that use your local compute). This is actually starting to work!
In summary:
- As LLMs get better, they will do more and more of the legwork autonomously, and a lot more of our work will rise up the abstractions into oversight and understanding.
- Luckily, LLMs can help here too because as intelligence and code are increasingly abundant, you can ask for large, custom, discardable software artifacts (e.g. web apps, video explainers) that would have never made sense to create before. Push the boundaries here and you'll be surprised.
I have been hearing the exact same takes every single day for over a year now.
Let me break it down for you again:
1. Local AI running on setups like DGX Sparks or Mac Studio is already hitting faster tokens per second than most Cloud AI.
2. Back when $20 subs were standard, people claimed local rigs cost years of subscription fees.
Now people burn through $500 monthly plans and still hit usage caps. It will only get more expensive.
3. People who bought their hardware a year ago, or even just a few weeks ago, are already seeing up to a 200% return simply from hardware price jumps.
4. Local AI never gets nerfed overnight, and it never goes down because of server outages.
5. Absolute raw intelligence is slightly behind top cloud models, but it easily matches last gen flagships.
That is more than enough for most real work. On top of that, you get zero censorship and full privacy that Cloud AI cannot offer.
This Post is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more






























