
LawrenceH
2.2K posts

LawrenceH
@LawrenceH
Last night I hit the Pick 3, bought some Air Force 1s.



LLM Knowledge Bases Something I'm finding very useful recently: using LLMs to build personal knowledge bases for various topics of research interest. In this way, a large fraction of my recent token throughput is going less into manipulating code, and more into manipulating knowledge (stored as markdown and images). The latest LLMs are quite good at it. So: Data ingest: I index source documents (articles, papers, repos, datasets, images, etc.) into a raw/ directory, then I use an LLM to incrementally "compile" a wiki, which is just a collection of .md files in a directory structure. The wiki includes summaries of all the data in raw/, backlinks, and then it categorizes data into concepts, writes articles for them, and links them all. To convert web articles into .md files I like to use the Obsidian Web Clipper extension, and then I also use a hotkey to download all the related images to local so that my LLM can easily reference them. IDE: I use Obsidian as the IDE "frontend" where I can view the raw data, the the compiled wiki, and the derived visualizations. Important to note that the LLM writes and maintains all of the data of the wiki, I rarely touch it directly. I've played with a few Obsidian plugins to render and view data in other ways (e.g. Marp for slides). Q&A: Where things get interesting is that once your wiki is big enough (e.g. mine on some recent research is ~100 articles and ~400K words), you can ask your LLM agent all kinds of complex questions against the wiki, and it will go off, research the answers, etc. I thought I had to reach for fancy RAG, but the LLM has been pretty good about auto-maintaining index files and brief summaries of all the documents and it reads all the important related data fairly easily at this ~small scale. Output: Instead of getting answers in text/terminal, I like to have it render markdown files for me, or slide shows (Marp format), or matplotlib images, all of which I then view again in Obsidian. You can imagine many other visual output formats depending on the query. Often, I end up "filing" the outputs back into the wiki to enhance it for further queries. So my own explorations and queries always "add up" in the knowledge base. Linting: I've run some LLM "health checks" over the wiki to e.g. find inconsistent data, impute missing data (with web searchers), find interesting connections for new article candidates, etc., to incrementally clean up the wiki and enhance its overall data integrity. The LLMs are quite good at suggesting further questions to ask and look into. Extra tools: I find myself developing additional tools to process the data, e.g. I vibe coded a small and naive search engine over the wiki, which I both use directly (in a web ui), but more often I want to hand it off to an LLM via CLI as a tool for larger queries. Further explorations: As the repo grows, the natural desire is to also think about synthetic data generation + finetuning to have your LLM "know" the data in its weights instead of just context windows. TLDR: raw data from a given number of sources is collected, then compiled by an LLM into a .md wiki, then operated on by various CLIs by the LLM to do Q&A and to incrementally enhance the wiki, and all of it viewable in Obsidian. You rarely ever write or edit the wiki manually, it's the domain of the LLM. I think there is room here for an incredible new product instead of a hacky collection of scripts.



これ使ってた人いますか? 私の周りだとフロッピーディスクの次世代は圧倒的に3.5インチのMOが多くて、これの実物を見たことがないくらいです😅







The U.S. Navy doesn’t understand how resilient oil tankers are, according to comments from former CENTCOM commander in this TWZ interview. It’s surprising and not. USN rarely deals with commercial shipping issues. But could be why we’re still talking about naval escorts rather than air power to reopen Hormuz. Here’s Votel’s comments: “But the mines, I think, are a really, really hard issue. And when we think about one of these big tankers, so they are just really vulnerable, they’re thin-hulled, getting into this very narrow traffic scheme that’s there – two miles wide, right in the middle of the Strait and then hitting a mine and being disabled on the spot. Not only will we have a mine problem, we have a disabled ship problem and an ecological disaster, and a whole bunch of other things there. So in my view, I think the worst case situation kind of looks like a deliberate mining effort by the Iranians.” Wrong info: —Oil tankers today have double hulls, neither thin nor vulnerable. But even when tankers had single hulls during the Iran-Iraq war, they were so resilient to mines that U.S. navy destroyers sailed BEHIND the tankers for protection. *The tankers protected the destroyers from mines.* —The narrowest navigable passage is 20 miles, not 2 miles. The traffic lanes are 2 miles wide to reduce accidents in a congested waterway, but it’s not a physical barrier. It’s like the difference between the physical width of a whole highway vs. the lanes painted for cars. Tankers can sail outside the lines for 20 miles. Multiple disabled tankers couldn’t block the strait. To be fair, Votel called it a traffic scheme but I think this point is easily misunderstood. —Spilling oil isn’t ecologically good, obvs, but oil cargoes in VLCCs are stored in 15-17 different cells (depending on ship design) and if you rupture one, you only spill its contents — maybe ~120,000 barrels — on a total cargo of 2 million barrels. Still not good but not total emptying. —Even ruptured tankers, even incinerated tankers, usually stay afloat and can often be repaired so they can sail away under their own power. That happened with the MV Limburg off the coast of Yemen in 2002. It was struck by a suicide boat, lost 50k barres of oil and burned for 2 days. On day 3 it was repaired and sailed away on its own power. It was subsequently renamed the Maritime Jewel and was in service until at least 2009. Any mission to open the Strait of Hormuz under Iranian fire would be costly and risky. But it’s shocking to me that the USN @USNavy @CENTCOM doesn’t know the basics of oil shipping when they’ve been preparing this contingency for years. They need to talk with industry, stat. The Coast Guard @USCG might have this knowledge because they DO deal with commercial shipping issues but they’re so far down the bureaucratic prestige chain I’m not sure people would listen (sorry USCG, you rock and I’m a big fan). This lack of understanding might be why the USN and U.S. policymakers keep talking about using naval escorts rather than air power, as if this was still WWII. @defpriorities @haltman twz.com/news-features/…











