Asymmetric multiprocessing with your mom

Strong dislike for papers that tell me what to do in the title, especially when even the paper admits a loose correlation of the intermediate tokens compared to solution correctness. My solutions work and they speak for themselves.

This is a position paper. Its purpose is to advocate for a specific viewpoint to the ML community.

From [1]: "Position papers make an argument for a viewpoint or perspective about what should be done [...]"

[1] https://icml.cc/Conferences/2026/CallForPositionPapers

Sure, and the parent comment's position is that they dislike it. Its purpose is to advocate against clickbait titles becoming normalized in the scientific community.

This is the opposite of clickbait. The topic is obvious from the title.

Clickbait doesn't have to be false, it has to be shocking. Being false is one way of being shocking. "Stop doing X!" -- really now?

> My solutions work and they speak for themselves.

I understand the sentiment, and I also use the "thinking" traces as insight, but wouldn't you want your solutions to be based upon a good understanding? If the correlation is weak, then our solution is also weak.

I admit I didn't read the paper, but if thinking traces are not "thinking", then what are they? If their content is not representing progress towards a solution then they are irrelevant and we should just be able to remove them and save a lot of time and money. There's a lot of money to be made by doing so. So why are they there at all? What do they represent?

A paper title is marketing, you’re expected to read its content

I hate articles that do this as well in the title. It's basically just a form of clickbait.

If “terms are simply created for understanding”, then why is their misuse so unimportant? Isn’t the whole point of a term’s use in understanding only obtained with the proper usage? Isn’t improper usage actually creating confusion and misunderstanding? Shouldn’t you care?

Autism being a spectrum doesn’t mean it is not a true/false. Both can be true. You can either be autistic (somewhere on the spectrum) or not on the spectrum at all.

Can you please elaborate?

To me autism is a spectrum, from statistically non neuro divergent (if there is something like that), to severely disabled (there may be more dimensions)

You can be non-autistic, or you can autistic. And if you are autistic, you exist somewhere on the autism spectrum. If you are not autistic, you are nowhere on this spectrum.

Neuro Typical is the term you are looking for. And, I agree with you about the spectrum. But people seem to take it more extreme.

Thank you for the term I was missing. What are the "more extreme" elements?

yw. I think people treat is as black/white true/false. Like autisim is mostly the same. Im my experiences, the spectrum is very wide. I heard someone refer to it as flavors which I thought was interesting.

AI;R AI did read it for me

Must be an AI generated acronym: that semicolon looks like LLM signature to me

I’d not use Windows

Asahi Linux is NOT an option and may never be one due to: The A18 Pro (and M4) introduced SPTM — Secure Page Table Monitor — which runs at a higher privilege level (GXF EL2) than the OS kernel. Unlike M1/M2/M3 where m1n1 can directly chainload Linux, on A18 Pro/M4 the page table infrastructure is owned by SPTM and must be initialized by XNU before anything else can run. You cannot bypass it. (source: https://github.com/rusch95/asahi_neo)

More like the inverse. No true Scotsman seeks to remove someone from belonging to a group to keep the group pure, because no true member of that group could act in such a way. This is adding people to a group that they would otherwise be excluded from. It seeks to expand the definition of the group to include the outsiders.

so, “yes false Scotsman”?

On the 100% cpu issue, I’m curious to know, what is the processor and was it performing any other cpu intensive work?

I’m not sure why any of this matters? I was looking at top, and the only two non-idle processes were claude and codex.