[HN Gopher] What would an LLM OS look like? (2023)
___________________________________________________________________
What would an LLM OS look like? (2023)
Author : ecto
Score : 17 points
Date : 2024-03-13 17:51 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (campedersen.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (campedersen.com)
| PheonixPharts wrote:
| > The future will be agentic.
|
| Minor pet-peeve, but I can't take anyone who uses the term
| "agentic" seriously. Computer Science has long used the concept
| of an "agent" and the adjective form of such systems has been
| "agent based" [0].
|
| There is nothing that makes "agent based" LLMs different than
| other "agent" systems in computer science, so using the term
| "agentic", for me at least, is just short hand for "I'm not
| familiar with the history of AI in computer science".
|
| I don't know if Karpathy has used that exact phrase, and if he
| has, he _obviously_ is an expert in both AI in particular and
| computer science in general. But the majority of people I 've
| heard use the phrase "agentic" are just trying to sound
| cool/cutting edge when referring to a concept that has a long
| history in the field.
|
| 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent-based_model
| danielmarkbruce wrote:
| It was meant to be an analogy...
| freitzkriesler2 wrote:
| I yearn for the day I can address my computer as "computer" and
| have it reply back to me in a dry monotone Majelle Barrett voice
| while not sounding fake and cheary.
| __loam wrote:
| Probably like the oses we have now. Let's see what they say.
|
| E: They want to put LLMs in the kernel, hahaha
|
| EE: Another comment, now that I've stopped laughing, they mention
| that Moore's law will continue to pay dividends, but we are
| literally running up to the physical limits of computation
| already. We've been able to keep things going by going parallel
| but we're getting closer to situations where the size of the
| atoms forming the transistors are the limiting factor. That and
| the heat.
|
| Furthermore, I'm not sure it's prudent to be inventing very
| energy intensive computing paradigms at a time when the planet is
| getting warmer and warmer. Doubly so when the utility of that
| paradigm is dubiously more useful than the "classical" paradigm
| and costs more than twice the power.
| ambersahdev wrote:
| Very similar to what I've been working on for a bit -
| https://github.com/AmberSahdev/Open-Interface
|
| I think the idea of self-operating computers should get more
| traction than it currently does. Imagine wanting to create a song
| and not having to watch 10 hours of Garage Band Youtube
| tutorials.
| weitendorf wrote:
| I think "OS" has too much baggage as a term for what Karpathy was
| describing.
|
| As a term, it implies a specific kind of implementation that
| doesn't necessarily reflect the high-level properties he laid out
| - all the user journeys and applications he lists are something
| you could implement in userspace. They just require interfacing
| with files and the internet and other software, not kernel-level
| access to those resources.
|
| Incidentally, I'm working on building such a system. And I have a
| different thesis: LLMs should be given nice interfaces and APIs
| to use for the same reason we prefer them. A deep interface, such
| as the way Linux unifies all the different I/O and networking
| semantics with shared APIs, makes using the system easier with
| less risk of mistakes or need to reinvent the wheel. Exposing
| those to LLMs allows them to spend more cycles fulfilling the
| user's need as-stated, and less cycles fiddling with hardware and
| core OS functionality.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-14 23:01 UTC)