u/Gear5th

so context length can scale infinitely within expanding memory

nothing scales infinitely. Your O(1) matrix comes at the cost of forgetting things. Have you done any long context benchmarks?

See, every one under the moon claims to have a novel O(1) attention mechanism. Exactly 0 of them are useable. If you're making a bold claim, you need evidence to back it up.

You claim 122kb per token for KV cache, while modern attention architectures are 100x cheaper. DeepSeek for example needs < 1kb per token.

https://youtube.com/shorts/grrZBOLDT8k?si=Ctw49Fnaqecxi5o6

Bro devs in US earn 300$/hr.. you're earning that per month. That's called exploitation.

/r/iamverysmart

you should have just invented a time machine from the get go. Going-back-in-time needs will only go up, as the world gets shittier.

Yeah, you can personally have the director of IIT sit the jee in your place for that money

You too can get a degree from Harvard if you donate 50 million.

For IITs just 5 million is more than enough though. And they will name some department after you.

I mean, don't you think in layers?

You do. That's literally how the brain works. Different parts of the brain construct thoughts in "layers". That's also literally how LLMs work. They think in layers.

Yes, output may be linear, because that's how language works.

Same for LLMs.

but on the thought level. I knew the 'shape' of the idea, and the skeleton of this comment before I wrote all this.

That's also what the LLM does. Just like your internal thoughts are hidden and all I see is your linear comment, the LLM's internal thoughts are hidden and you only see the next token output.

While LLMs don't know where their train of thought is going, as the tracks are being laid one token at a time, and then fed back into it to decide what comes next.

You can literally take the vector at an internal layer and produce the entire sentence instead of the next token. It won't be a perfectly formulated sentence, just like you wouldn't know the exact words of your comment before you start linearly writing them. The next token being fed into the LLM is just the part where the LLM refines the thought.

Think of my comment.

• Did you read it word by word? So will the LLM.
• After reading part of a sentence, didn't you already have a decent idea of what the sentence was saying? So does the LLM.
• Were you still forced to read it word by word, because that's how language works? Same for the LLM.

They show only 1 example output image across all the links? Doesn't seem like they're confident in their results.

Won't that lead to a contradiction though? If your statement can be encoded using set theory, then Rayo's number is already larger, since your statement takes less than a googol symbols.

If it cannot be encoded using set theory, it violates the contest rules against using primitive language tricks.

Dude for real, I had covered the barrel with this paper. It should have stopped the bullet.

The bullet tore right through it, even though the paper specifically asked the bullet to stay put.

Not my fault bro. I can't be held liable.

I meant the part where the laser strikes the tin droplets. They miss 0% of the strikes. Not 0.000000000..1%. Exactly 0%.

While the droplets are moving at incredible speeds, and the scope of error is exactly 0.

Both. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markdown#History

Then just post a verified PnL link and get all the funding you need. Investors would flight to get a slice of that. 

• 90% of your profit comes from top 5 days.
• Most of your wins were on days that you bet the least. Whenever you bet confidently, you lose money.

At this amount of evidence, you're basically gambling and had a lucky run. If you sustain this for an year, that would change things!

All the best.

See, while I'll be happy to set up a meeting and have a look, I want you to understand that it is practically impossible to have such a strategy. It is almost guaranteed that your backtesting has some flaw, and that you're leaking future price values somehow.

So before you go about showing your proofs to some 3rd person, try to do the following

1. add a delay: instead of executing the trade when your strategy tells you to, wait for 1 or 2 candles. If that destroys your strategy, then you were leaking future.
2. add slippage: fill your order at the worst price of the next candle.
3. add costs: ensure that you are using the correct STT/brokerage/other fees
4. train/test split: if you're optimizing your strategy on some time period, do NOT use the same time period for testing it. Use a different time period.

If your strategy survives the above, and shows even 2% monthly returns, DM me. We can set up a meeting, and I can bring my friends to give you at least 10Cr in investment in under a week.

Try filling your order at the open of the next candle, or open of the next to next candle. If the strat falls apart, it was a fluke.

Will it run circles around sql?

It's geometric. You don't add 10% each time, you compound by 10%.

1.10¹² = 3.1384

Basically if you compound 10% gains 12 times, you triple your money.

PS: it isn't about 2x or 3x. Doubling your money each year is equally delusional.

Bro 10% monthly returns means you triple your money in an year. You're delusional.

No, you said

That makes you almost ₹50k-₹60k per month for every ₹5 lacs invested after accounting for comm and slippage

lol, you have a 10% monthly strat and you have 1L capital!?

If you can prove your strat gives even 2% monthly returns, I will invest 1Cr in it in a heartbeat! Anyone would.

At 10% monthly returns, Warren Buffet will personally give you a blowjob.

You didn't give just me a great deal, you've set a new standard of online marketing!