Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
89% Positive
Analyzed from 409 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#florida#https#embeddings#text#hamming#start#data#true#georgia#works
Discussion Sentiment
Analyzed from 409 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
Discussion (10 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
This post is from 2024 but I wrote about using this technique in https://emschwartz.me/binary-vector-embeddings-are-so-cool/
int8s, float16s are all fairly slow. I suppose it’s because BLAS does float32/64 very fast.
Separately, I’m a huge fan of your writing about search! It’s been very helpful while I’ve been building https://scour.ing.
start=$(date +%s); curl -s -X POST "https://[urlredacted].workers.dev/mcp" -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "Accept: application/json, text/event-stream" -d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"tools/call","params":{"name":"table_search_similar","arguments":{"key":"scotus_2010s","col":"M","query":"endangered fish"}}}' 2>&1 | grep '^data:' | sed 's/^data: //' | jq; end=$(date +%s); echo "elapsed: $((end-start))s" { "result": { "content": [], "structuredContent": { "has_more": true, "headers": { "A": "author_name", "B": "category", "C": "per_curiam", "D": "case_name", "E": "date_filed", "F": "federal_cite_one", "G": "absolute_url", "H": "year_filed", "I": "scdb_id", "J": "scdb_decision_direction", "K": "scdb_votes_majority", "L": "scdb_votes_minority", "M": "text" }, "offset": 0, "ok": true, "rows": [ { "A": "Justice Thomas", "B": "dissenting", "C": "False", "D": "Florida v. Georgia", "E": "2018-06-27", "F": "", "G": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4511641/florida-v-geor...", "H": "2018", "I": "", "J": "", "K": "", "L": "", "M": "Florida asks this Court to cap Georgia’s use of water in\nthe Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin (Basin).\nFlorida claims that such a cap would allow additional\nwater to flow into the Apalachicola River and Bay, which\nwould benefit Florida by alleviating certain ecological\nharms. To prevail under our precedents, Florida must\npresent clear and convincing evidence that its proposed\ncap will benefit Florida more than it harms Georgia. See\nColorado v. New Mexico, 459 U.S. 176, 187 (1982) (Colo-\nrado I ). The Special Master applied this balance-of-harms\nstandard and, after presiding over a 1-month trial involvÂ\ning 40 witnesses and more than 2,000 exhibits, found that\nFlorida had not met its burden. Because that finding\nis well supported by the evidence, I would have over-\nruled Florida’s objections to the Special Master’s Report\n(Report) and denied Florida’s request for relief. I respectfully\ndissent.\n I\n The Court’s recitation of the facts focuses o", "_match": true, "_row": 1189 },
elapsed: 12s (on my laptop)