I heard from a friend that you can rent VPSs in pretty much any non-western country with some bitcoin (as long as you do nothing illegal, they don't care). I wouldn't suggest using it to circumvent any laws, but my friend used it for enhanced privacy
So i just finished a long running project (10 years ftw) just to deepdive into the next one.
I have no public sources yet (will come at some point) but ill try to break it down into some simple points. After all: this is a research project.
Project: DeepThought
So instead of going for the path to take bigger and bigger models to solve more complex questions, i going another direction. My idea is to use LLM's in a way like an "inner monologue" to replicate a thought chain. Basically create thinking steps that can be dynamically chained.
Additionally, the project contains a 3 layer memory system which is parted into:
1. Frontbrain (this data composes the context for inference, its a set of "hot nodes" which have a temprature that per turn of conversation will cool down a bit, while if they are used in a "thinking process" get warmed up a big again. The idea is to have the context for the inference to only get the currently relevant information, while dropping of things that lost relevance. This should prevent context overflow
2. STM : Basically a session memory. This will keep all information from the current session even if they got to cold and dropped out of Frontbrain
3. LTS : LTS is always query'able for the thought process to retrieve information/structures, but only at the sessions end information is propagated from the STM to LTS. This makes identification of "unique" entities alot easier and has some other advantages.
So when you type something into the DeepThought engine, it will extract all information from your input and convert it into a kinda 2 type structure
1. A bitemporal hypergraph composed of Entities and Hyperatoms. While entities i think are kinda easy to grasp, hyperatoms can either represent "properties" (in form of facts) or relations to other entities. This allows to create a graph structure typed information network containing the relevant information
2. Frame summaries. Since only having a structured graph as just described looses a lot of processual/logical information which are relevant especially in more complex contexts, i also create basically short summary texts that are linked to entities.
This structures allow me to use dynamic graph traversal for searching for data, while also retrieving the related Frame summaries that are a more native variant for an LLM to understand logics and relations.
This is a very very superifical explaination because to go into detail would take quite prolly multiplage pages of info.
Important: Im running this on a local 5090 and it is NOT friendly in terms of amount of inferences (which is fine for me). I try to mimic a thought process not build a fast shipping product. Quality > quantity. If you would run DeepThought on any online inference provider your broke in 1 day.
So, rn i focus on the ingestion and retrieval logics to make storing and retrieving as good as possible with my hw options.
While the ingestions already involves multiple steps in which the "llm" basically works as judge to decide where to traverse in the graph, where to go into recursion and similar, this will become very relevant as soon ill start implementing "task execution" as capability.
If i solved those the next point is to reduce everything that i need in terms of thinking steps in what i would call "thinking primitives". The idea with those is, that i dont want a hardcoded thinking process, but it rather also want to have the thinking process in form of a graph structure. This would allow me to compose the process in form of data in the hyepergraph, which would in return allow me to enable the system to refactor/enhance its own thought processes.
So ye thats what im working on rn, very early concept/alpha phase.
Dont wanne be the devils advocate here, but reality is that even if you find something "looking legit" in terms of donation, especially in such regions the most money will be "lost" halfway, and even if some will reach the destination it is more than rare that it will even help to benefit those suffering, and not land in the pockets of a few "in power" or just used to buy more weapons to kill more people.....
Yes helping is a good thing, tho reality is its not as "easy" as transfer some money. Tho respecting your good intentions
That's overly cynical. Donating to local warlords / psuedogovernment actors can be sketchy. Donating to e.g., UNICEF is much more likely to produce good results for refugees, especially children and mothers.
I'm not aware of where to send money to stop wars - it's likely to have the opposite effect, sadly.
Even donations to organisations such as UNICEF often end up in the wrong hands.
Lets go for the optimistic scenario in which UNICEF will only take a very small portion for the "processing" and really deliver lets say food and medical supplies to the region. Those warloard will simply come and take it away from those citizens and provide to their armies. Theres nothing those citizens can do against it.
Do i wish it would be different? Absolutely. But sadly the world doesn't work as i would wish it to.
I'm not sure where you get your assumptions from, but UNICEF works in camps and outposts that people come to, often in safer areas to treat refugees and establish aid stations. They don't catapult money/food/water into warring nations and call it a wash.
UNICEF also works on a permissioned basis: They wait until they are asked, and so they often work in countries neighboring crisis centers, where it is much safer anyway. They are constantly negotiating to be "asked", yes, but this is through diplomatic ties. UNICEF works with refugees mostly, not in war zones. For famine/disease intervention, they are at ground zero, but again with permission.
And UNICEF's overhead is low - they are efficient, considering they sometimes have to establish, e.g., their own refueling station networks, cold storage logistics, flight controllers, etc. Often, powerful industrialists in the target nations provide significant help - or at least I know of one case of this.
I'm close to UNICEF, or was, so I got sneak peaks into some of the problems they deal with. I assure you, "processing" is not a revenue stream for them.
You're thinking of the breast cancer scams. UNICEF is not a charity, they're a logistics organization with nation-state level resources. When Amazon can do it cheaper - they use Amazon. No organization is perfect, but this one is good.
I was approached on the street by a girl working for a marketing company, wanting me to start a subscription for $20 a month to Save the Children which I think is a pretty well regarded charity. We hit it off and met up later and I asked her about the job. For each person who signs up, she would get about $60. So that's the first three months of my subscription in her pocket. Furthermore, her employer would fly them around the country, staying about 2 weeks in a city, living in hotels and expenses paid. This girl did not even have a home, she lived permanently in hotels paid for by her employer. And of course the employer needs some profit on top, so I'd estimate that's at least like 3-6 more months of my subscription going towards her employer/expenses.
I wonder how many more of these private companies exist to just siphon off these donation streams? The charity itself may be efficient, but how many private companies provide goods and services to them for a healthy profit?
1) group charities as "charities" when large "nonprofit / ngo" term is more suitable.
2) assume that wasteful _free_ money to a charity makes the charity less good. If a third party takes 90% of the money they raise and gives 10% to the charity, then that's free money for the charity. It's deceptive, and they are cutting a huge profit on the back of the good work the charity does, but that does not mean they are complicit, necessarily. The charity would have to sue that third party company to shut them down, and for what? Do reduce their own project budgets and also lose the money?
The third party is working with the charity(or ngo or whatever). The charity is essentially paying them for marketing, using a huge chunk of the money people think they're giving to charity. The charity is complicit in this deception, and the third party presents themselves as volunteers "Hello, I'm with Save the Children, we do bla bla bla look at this picture of a starving child would you be interested in helping us by giving money every month to give this starving child a better life?"
They don't tell you they're paid to be there. They don't tell you the first year of payments goes directly to a private company.
I looked up Save the Children in some charity index thing a while back and it was listed as something like 94% of the money they receive goes to the stated cause which I doubt includes these marketing costs. You could say this is still worth it because they increase the amount of money the charity receives even if a lot of it goes to the company. But it doesn't seem right to me, not when they deceive people this way.
The charities sign a contract with the third parties unfortunately - eg they have permission from the charity.
Here in Europe oxfam for example uses some of these private companies and they get the first year of donations and from the 2nd year it goes to oxfam itself.
Apparently the average person cancels donations after 2,5 years so for a zero marketing budget (for oxfam) they make 1.5 year x your donation.
When I first found out I was disgusted and some majors in countries in Europe have tried to ban such "paid charity workers"... (They tend to operate near train stations etc.
I'm a member of an organization that collects money for Sudanese soup kitchens and hospitals in affected areas (https://sound-of-sudan.org/) , and I know a few other organizations that indirectly support such campaigns (e.g. https://sudfa-media.com/). Being personally acquainted with people, who spend much of their time, energy and last-but-not-least their own money on such activities, your claim makes me slightly angry.
> such regions the most money will be "lost" halfway
Please elaborate and don't lump all "regions" in with each other. My personal impression is that the combination of the community kitchen movement (which has its roots in the failed Sudanese revolution) and money transfers to mobile phones makes it relatively transparent where one's money goes and what it achieves. I'm not in the US, but I have no doubt that money donated to an organization like the Sudanese American Medical Association (https://sama-sd.org/about-us/finances/) largely reaches the people that need it.
> Those warloard will simply come and take it away from those citizens and provide to their armies.
I can assure you none of use would send money to hospitals or community kitchens, if this was likely to happen. What makes you think so?
So, let me first of all clear up one thing. I did not, and never intended to, degrade anyone who actually tries to make a difference. If you read my original comment, you can see that I clearly state that I respect the wish to help. I also state that I wish the world were a "better" place where things work the way we would like them to—but reality has too often proven otherwise. Also, while I will try to fully address your points, the totality of this problem is too complex and has too many factors to incorporate every variable; therefore, at some point, we have to refer to "grouping." I think you will understand what I mean by that.
When I referred to "such regions," I was personally referring to a combination of factors: infrastructure, supply chain consistency, reliability, and the general political situation. In this case, I would argue that poor infrastructure impacts transport and storage control when it comes to shipments. Supply chain consistency (even with organizations like UNICEF) is often not guaranteed; local partners change frequently, often influenced by the local situation, making it nearly impossible in some regions to maintain trusted chains. Reliability suffers because of these factors—when it is hard to maintain trusted partners, the problem persists. As for the political situation, I don’t believe I need to elaborate further.
So, when I say "such regions," I mean areas that fit this basic pattern. While not a perfect comparison, a notable example of this is when food supplies sent for civilians are intercepted by local armed groups. The supplies might reach the target location, but they do not always feed the people they were intended for. As you work in this area, you likely know this is not an isolated occurrence.
I am also not from the US, and I cannot speak specifically to the Sudanese American Medical Association. If they are truly creating change, that is a great thing, and everyone is free to donate to them. You will not see me advocating against donating to them.
Regarding your question on why I think you would send aid even if diversion was likely: I don't believe you would willingly fund "warlords." Rather, I believe that in high-risk regions, the intent of the donor doesn't always control the reality on the ground. My skepticism isn't a critique of your virtue or your specific organization, but a reaction to a historical pattern of aid diversion in volatile zones. You do this work because you believe the collected money will reach its destination and will not be abused, and I respect that you follow your beliefs for the "greater good."
You seem to be a good person doing important work, and to do that, you need to believe in the efficacy of your mission.
I wrote my own in-Memory Graph (i'd rather call it storage than a DB) some years ago in golang, even there i was wondering if golang actually is the optimal technology for something like a database especially due to the garbage collection/stop the world/etc. Its just there are certain levels of optimization i will never be able to properly reach (lets ignore possible hacks). Looking at a solution in typescript, no matter how "nice" it looks, this just doesnt seem to be the correct "tool/technology" for the target.
And inb4, there are use cases for everything, and same as i wouldn't write a website in C, i also wouldn't write a database in javascript/typescript.
I just would argue this is the wrong pick.
@llms : im not even getting into this because if you dont wanne read "llm" you basically can't read 99% of news nowadays. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
edit: im a big fan of graph databases so im happy about every public attention they get ^
I feel ya.... and i have to admit in the past i tried it for one article in my own blog thinking it might help me to express... tho when i read that post now i dont even like it myself its just not my tone.
therefor decided not gonne use any llm for blogging again and even tho it takes alot more time without (im not a very motivated writer) i prefer to release something that i did rather some llm stuff that i wouldnt read myself.
Saw your post and thought: maybe i can make someones day so well here i am reading it :D
Big props on the no install / no register etc philosophy. If i would had to make any account i probably would have closed it instantly again xD
So the first thing i STRONGLY recommend, add somewhere a help text (before starting game or small on the side of ingame and ability to disable via options) for the controles.
Im on a Desktop, i started the game and i expected some sort of short info about controles. Yes theres a tutorial - no i didnt play it. I mean lets be honest... tryNSucceed :D
So ye i spend the first 2-3 Stages only spamming spacebar because it didnt came to my mind that maybe its with mouse support (visually it really hard compares to vs-likes that dont support mouse).
So i can tell - ice mage with just massive rapid space spamming works perfectly fine through the whole earth stage. ^^
I find the base look finem the overview texts for the different arch types is well done (even tho it confused me that fire and ice dont have weaknesses?).
The point that at least for me was the most well, unpleasent? , is the size of the play area. I guess you made this to fit easy with smartphone screens, but on a desktop its like not even 1/4 of my screen (and im not on 4k or something) so dunno it feels just alot to small. May fit for a smartphone but for a desktop its just very very limiting while the game takes alot of space for basically nothing.
Also, you definatly should have a "Settings" button in the game pause menu which allows for changing sound levels. Not just a "total sound" bar but at least have Music and Sounds (attack etc) seperated. Because, frankly speaking, the music while for the first like 30 seconds is cool, very fast is dunno it just would fit more to the entry video scene of something than as a constant thing (my pov) - so i wish i would be able to just disable the music and still have the attack/battle sounds. Adjusting both tho would be great anyway and i think with phaser should be quite doable.
A smaller point (visual) is the size of the health/mana bars. Even tho i know they are in the top left, i kinda have to squeece my eyes sometimes to see them. So i would probably just make them bigger.
That all said, i mean i just played solo till the fire stage :) and i clearly had a bit of fun.
I would say its a great start and if you go on and refine it i see a chance that people might pick it up as a nobrainer lets just game something solution :)
Ishikawa : a framework/architecture for automated Attack Surface Mapping & Vulnerability scanning
- golang based architecture
- information is dynamically mapped into one central directed knowledge graph
- default multithreading
- utilizes existing tools (such as nmap/nuclei/katana/wfuzz/....) instead of reinventing the wheel
- architecture is (tldr) a self supervising logic in which every worker is also a scheduler that based on delta causality uses cartesian fanout and graph overlay mapping including local only witness nodes to dispatch new "jobs" without having a central scheduler or the necessity to scan a central total job queue to prevent duplicate executions.
In this architecture every "action" that can be executed defines an input structure necessary. If the previously mentioned mechanic identifies a possible job execution it will create a job input payload which will automatically be picked up by a worker an executed. Therefor every action is a self containing logic. This results in a organically growing knowledge graph without defining a full execution flow. It is very easy to extend.
I worked on this for the past ~10 years (private time). The sad truth tho is, while this project was initially planned to be open sourced - after i not to long ago for quite some bucks consulted a lawyer, i basically was presented with the fact that if i would publish it i could get sued due to germany's hacker and software reliability laws. So for now its only trapped on my disk and maybe will never see daylight.
Im right now working on a blog article (thats why i even mention it) about the whole thing with quite more detailed description and will also contain some example visual data. Maybe will post it on hackernews will see.
reply