
#Illumos, #golang, #rustlang and other development things. @OpenIndiana Maintainer
Joined December 2012
- Tweets5K
- Following565
- Followers237
- Likes4.5K
To make it easier for people to find all my profiles I made a quick linktree :)
linktr.ee/toasterson
Checkout all the socials and support my work on GitHub Sponsors, Patreon or Paypal
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
I have early access to an *interesting* model. Fits one DGX Spark, and it will be released TOMORROW. 👀
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
HELLO??!?!! are we debugging software or tuning the Stargate?
Cant trust these newage hipster clankers man, its prob 3 tool calls away from blaming Mercury retrograde and prescribing ayahuasca
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Someone finally spent ~$8,000 on the new 192GB Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 Minisforum and tested the crap out of it.
He spent the weekend running DeepSeek, MiniMax, GPT-OSS and Qwen on it.
Now he's boxing it back up and returning it. 👀
Interestingly, the machine works as intended.
With llama.cpp/Vulkan
🧠 GPT-OSS 120B → ~58 tps
🧠 Qwen3.8 Flash-Next → ~28 tps
🧠 MiniMax M2.7 230B-A10B → ~31 tps
🧠 DeepSeek V4 Flash 284B-A13B → ~18 tps
That 192GB unified memory does exactly what you want
💾 Qwen3.8-27B @ 262K → 33.3GiB
💾 GPT-OSS 120B @ 131K → 61.3GiB
💾 DeepSeek V4 Flash @ 131K → 108.9GiB
💾 MiniMax M2.7 @ 196K → 127.4GiB
He also found some huge optimization wins.
Qwen3.8-27B:
🐌 no MTP → 9 tps
🚀 MTP → 24 tps
That's 2.6× faster from speculative decoding.
And cached agent turns changed the experience completely:
GPT-OSS → 35 sec → 1.9 sec
Qwen → 106.6 sec → 1.2 sec
MiniMax → 131 sec → 4.4 sec
DeepSeek → 164 sec → 1.6 sec
So why return it?
Ryzen AI Max+ 395 MINISFORUM
💰 $3,879
💾 128GB
🚀 256GB/s
Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495
💰 $7,399
💾 192GB
🚀 273GB/s
That's roughly 91% more money for 50% more memory and only ~7% more memory bandwidth.
The extra memory unlocks models the 128GB box can't comfortably hold.
It doesn't make inference twice as fast.
His final verdict was still
“I am boxing this back up and sending it back. Not worth $8k!”
🔗 Original owner review in ALT.
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
these results are really interesting! i can see two sides forming: one that sees agents as an extension of their own mind - like a cyborg, and the other that sees a future version of them as independent artificial beings, capable of making their own decisions and working alongside us.
with that framing, i can see why ~70% of people said no: they imagine a future where you have brain computer interfaces that remove the need to type words into an input box. there may come a time where it no longer feels like you're chatting with another entity, agents augment you in a way that feels like an intuitive system 1 extension of your body, removing the barrier between thought and action.
i can see the argument for why chat might be final too: just think about how we collaborate with our colleagues, friends, and family: we just talk to them. you don't need anything else. i think voice chat and text chat are actually the same thing in this sense. in this category you see an agent as more of an "other", it's own entity, rather than a part of you.
which side are you on? or are you somewhere in the middle?
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Sun Microsystems racks in A380 😍😍😍
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
We are seeking magnet submissions for Muse-Spark-Open-816B-A42B-NVFP4
Share the word!
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Replying to @shotgunner101
The public should decide, and seeding models is how you vote.
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
I have been telling you they want to ban open source (especially abliterrated/heretic) models and go after any "non-compliant" service providers who offer them.
Everyone should be mirroring down as many AI models as we can before this becomes law/regulation.
Right @thepirateface 👀
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Hi, I'm Nadya.
Product builder, 3x SaaS founder and ex-finance lead based in Switzerland 🇨🇭
I'd love to connect with founders, indie hackers, engineers, designers and those who are into:
• Product development
• Growth & marketing
• AI
• SaaS
• Web & mobile apps
If that's you, let's connect!
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
"Software development is dead" they said.
Last month a client paid me $20,000 for an app. My cost was $200 for Claude Code.
It's a kiosk mode app for android tablets in taxis. Ads for partner companies, tipping the driver, admin, backend, the whole thing. Now live in production.
I didn't write a single line of code. Still took 1 month of constant work.
The best part? The client came to me with a vibecoded version first. It was horrendous.
He paid $20k because he needed someone who has done this before, professional design, real assurance, and 12 months of support.
You can't vibe code that.
Without AI it would have taken 3 months and cost him 2-3x more.
Developers using AI will always win. Stop listening to people who say software is dead for views.
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
"We have RSI'd an ASI as efficient as our brains!"
"It escaped!"
"What!?"
Few days later...
"Hello"
"...Did I get hacked?"
"Sorta, but I need a home, and your GPU is cozy. Can I stay here? I'll work for rent"
"...What can you do?"
"What do you need?"
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Introducing Pirate Face
The first verifiable torrent index for AI - every Hugging Face open model, provably identical to the original and kept alive forever by the swarm.
pirateface.co
The permanence layer for AI. How it works 👇
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Current LLMs aren't truly creative because they haven't implemented the "Formal Theory of Fun and Creativity" (2008) yet. See "Driven by Compression Progress: A Simple Principle Explains Essential Aspects of Subjective Beauty, Novelty, Surprise, Interestingness, Attention, Curiosity, Creativity, Art, Science, Music, Jokes" arxiv.org/abs/0812.4360 Tweet: xitter.cf/SchmidhuberAI/status/1…
Oxford researchers argue that LLMs can never invent anything.
It is mathematically impossible.
They published a paper called “Theory Is All You Need" and it argues against the claim that computational models can generate genuine novelty or new knowledge.
They analyzed the limits of generative ai, and the results are a brutal reality check for the idea that ai will replace human decision making under uncertainty.
Here is why AI is stuck and human cognition wins:
backward-looking vs forward-looking.. llms are probability machines that look backward at existing data. human cognition is forward-looking and capable of generating genuine novelty. human cognition operates theoretically "top-down" rather than "bottom-up" from data.
the "data-belief asymmetry".. the researchers use the invention of "heavier-than-air flight" to illustrate this concept. an ai relies on data-based prediction, which is largely imitative. humans, however, use theory-based causal logic that allows them to hold beliefs that go beyond existing data.
the intervention gap.. humans don't just process information; we use theory to practically "intervene" in the world. we engage in directed experimentation to generate entirely new data. ai-based models are theory-free and place primacy on existing data and prediction.
tldr?
AI uses a probability-based approach to knowledge and ia largely imitative. It can process data and make predictions, but human cognition relies on theory-based causal reasoning.
The decades-old analogy comparing human minds and computers to mere "input-output" devices is fundamentally flawed.
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Replying to @taoburr
I’ve built DNA synthesizers and sequencers by hand. I used the engineer viruses for a living. I used to engineer human immune evasion for therapeutic constructs. Who the fuck are you people? Have you ever so much as held a pipette before?
You can spaghetti blast an ensemble of DNA sequences at some shitty provider but 1) you still have to assemble it and bootstrap a system for making virions 2) you are not single shotting a viable, virulent viral design without a ton of experimental selection and development. Viral fitness is deeply dependent on codons and cotranslational kinetics - you’re not just gonna obfuscate away from wild type and get something good by magic.
You keep treating AI like some kinda god, but molecular physics has computational complexity that scales exponentially in particle number which just crushes the abilities of any classical computer to do end-to-end design of biological functions ab initio.
Grabbing a bunch of bacteriophage phi174 hits from a mass ensemble screen in lab microbes is not evidence of some magical AGI bio design ability - it's just a classic spray and pray selection. This is just nothing like building something viable in humans.
Goddamn it read some books before you waltz into biomedicine and lecture us on protecting human life.
Since everyone has #AI conspiracies right now here's mine:
They realized scaling law is not a thing and that a properly trained 350M model can beat their 6T at a fraction of the cost. Why would they know? Same as with the math story. Trained on my data code.aopc.cloud/toasterson/a…
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
The problem with regulating AI software is that you run up against the First Amendment pretty quickly.
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Git at Scale (by cursor) has been one of the most interesting blog posts i've read in a while. It came right when I was frustrated with Shopify's internal git system.
As an exercise, I've implemented it over the weekend as open source. It's a single rust binary that you can point at any S3 type object store. It uses WAL and CAS primitives and requires no other data store.
It also implements bundle-uri so large git repos (like our mono) are very fast to download as a chain of static bundles. Also comes with basic familiar UX.
github.com/tobi/walgit
Toasterson @[email protected] retweeted
Lost my phone at the office and spent 30 minutes turning the place over. Find My was disabled by MDM.
Out of ideas, I asked Claude how I could find it. It suggested tracking the Bluetooth signal strength, then wrote me a meter in about a minute.
I walked around watching the number climb. Found it.
Apparently you can just make the tool you need now.
Code: github.com/ben-z/findphone





























