My question is what changes about LLM use cases when you’re getting 1000 tok/s? Models in silicon might dramatically change how we think about them.

Did you use chatjimmy? It's somewhat terrifying to use when you think of the potential results with a better model.

Ok, real life example: I now spend most of my time, as a developer, waiting for the agent to do its thing (after careful prompting, I'm also thinking about work stuff, don't worry I'm not useless). What if it gave back the same excellent results, but instantaneously? Why, then, I certainly would become the bottleneck. So, quite possibly, my last work task would be to plug this agent directly into the ticket system where the domain experts input their feature requests. Maybe we still need 1 developer out of 100, to coordinate releases and all that (ok, say 1 out of 10).

But that's not taking things far enough: why do we need these domain experts at all? Our pitch is clear, and all software-enabled, though it took years to develop. We can just have the clients express their concerns to the AI, directly or indirectly. Have multiple lighting-fast agents with different roles (refactoring agent, new features agent, debugger agent, domain expert agent, etc.). So we fire everyone, maybe keep 1 product owner / devops to keep the trolls out. The cost is still probably 100 times less than it used to be (beyond the initial cost of acquisition of the magic machine or whatever).

But one of these clients, surely, will realize that these 10 years of manual and slowly-automated development can now be emulated in very, very little time. Why not just, say, take screenshots of the entire app and feed them into the magic machine? Why, this way, they could have the service for a tenth of the yearly cost, forever!

And then the economy implodes.

I'm not saying it's THE most likely version of things, I'm saying that at a certain level, quantity (or rather, speed) is a quality all its own. And this new quality might change the world. Let's hope it's for the better!

Errors compound, and making 1000 wrong decisions per hour, will not result in something useful. Maybe you‘ve tried setting up guardrails for good design or architecture at some point? I think it’s simply not possible to do that.

It would certainly be an accelerator for people who know exactly what they want. And it would remove multi tasking, which I‘d appreciate.

AI helps you but also your competition, and gets factored in by investors while customers can use it to find better deals. The whole market is different even if a company did nothing.

Whatever you can cheaply do with AI is not a moat, if there is profit in there there will be quick imitation and competition will eat away those profits.

Models can be replaced easily, harnesses & AI tools too. And if cloud inference gets too expensive there are local models keeping the cloud prices hard capped.

Probably AI won't make anyone very rich.

This is the same pitch that people make about AI today. Speed isn’t the differentiator, quality is

So for every work produced by AI have ten separate agents review it thoroughly.

I'm not sure inference speed is always the slowest thing for me right now. The agent is running tests, loading webpages, etc, which all take time. I don't know if a fast agent would speed things up in all cases.

That said, it obviously depends on the project.

> "The agent is running tests, loading webpages, etc, which all take time"

A frustrating vision of the future would be when we've been asking for faster loading lighter web pages for years and then companies start caring about it and improving it not for us humans but for LLMs.

It's already kind of that way with MCP servers popping up everywhere. The JIRA MCP server is like a couple orders of magnitude faster to work with than the website itself.

That’s their API with extra steps, or am I missing something? That was always faster.

They finally cared about clear requirements and documentation when that meant getting rid of devs.

That happened at corpo work for each of: * Build times * CI latency * Developer tooling * Documentation * Modularity

I tried it. I asked where Bruce Lee was born. It stated he was born in Hong Kong. I challenged it and it went further naming a hospital there. I stated he was born in San Francisco and it apologized and then said his father was a missionary traveling in America, which was also wrong. Bruce’s father was a famous Cantonese Opera singer and actor.

This model had zero information right, while being fast in responding.

Unacceptable.

> I now spend most of my time, as a developer, waiting for the agent to do its thing (after careful prompting, I'm also thinking about work stuff, don't worry I'm not useless).

you need to launch 10-15 more terminals, who is waiting these days? :)

I think this reads like Ray Kurzwheil (sorry not able to spell that off top of my head, that bloke who wrote that book about the future) .. But yeah very dystopian and totally realistic. Not if but when..

I LOVE Kurzwheil! Thank you for the compliment, I'm very far from having his writing skills. But yes sci-fi is looking more and more like, well, sci.

In the case on on-device/self-hosted LLMs. You ask your agent to implement xyz feature 10 times and use a model to compare the outputs and combine the best results.

Raw intelligence becomes slightly less important when you can iterate and improve automatically. You can still claim it was "one shot" even when 30 different implementations were made then combined.

Problem is, there exists no judge model that will really pick the same winner that you would.

The best way I can explain it is that it's the same feeling when I upgraded from 56k dialup to cable broadband.

That likely isn't as relevant for on-device iPhone usage as it is for Real Work™. I won't notice the difference between 50tps and 1000tps when asking Siri a question.

I don't know. As others have said, the Taalas chip wasn't small, or particularly low power, so it's hard to "imagine" what that tech in an cell phone chip might look like.

But if the basic premise of "good enough LLM at insane throughput" holds, I think it could qualitatively change local uses of LLMs. At a certain speed point, you're able to move from request -> response to a cascade of tool calling and "subagents", which could allow a small model to be much more useful, if provided with a lot of local data and tool calls.

That said, this is assuming you could stuff a "good enough" model into a phone with Taalas-like technology. The Taalas tech demo was an 8B parameter model and required hundreds of watts (IIRC) to run. The efficiency was good given the speed (as I understand), but it's not clear at all that the approach scales small enough to be a sensible coprocessor on an iPhone or whatever.

> At a certain speed point, you're able to move from request -> response to a cascade of tool calling and "subagents"

That also needs server class hardware though. A phone won’t happily service the insane amount of IO, compute, and network that this cascade would require.

Box that plugs into my desktop would be fine. Or perhaps in SSF form factor.

But wouldn't higher tps allow for more reasoning or other hidden processes, potententially making a smarter model?

This is my thought as well. Models have to be intentional about which tokens they burn because there's a real lag time. If you can just fork out 10 different reasoning sessions at once with no regard for token waste/lag, you can compensate a smaller model with just doing more at once with it. No idea if this is reasonably true though.

I think that only works if you have checkpoints where all that reasoning can be checked against reality. Otherwise you get an army of armchair experts. LLMs are hilariously bad at home improvement advice btw, where reasoning alone won’t get you far.

That order of magnitude could be the difference between "the users wants me to open the notes app, let's open it" and "I've scanned all your notes before you could blink and found what you're looking for".

If Siri is using a 3T model in high reasoning mode to answer your question you will.

Massive economic simulations with thousands if not millions of agents to front run the global economy and stock market.

Fully interactive realtime NPCs in videogames at scale.

Recommender systems that simulate individual consumers.

Crazy shit

About your first example, isn’t the butterfly effect preventing this from being useful? One agent in your simulation decides to sell, and starts an avalanche, that won’t happen in reality?