I'm also available for patents and trust funds too
It could be pro-Chinese if you frame it like they give merit to anyone involved, or that they take care of their most valuable employees (maybe they pay them another way), or whatever.
Or just observant of how Chinese labs publish their stuff. (Not sure if it's always like that I haven't take a look at the number of authors in this type of publications. Or at least I can't remember it.)
You need to tighten up your tinfoil hat. When HN features all the discussions on OpenAI's shenanigans on Navier-Stokes, you weren't seeing claims this was anti-US.
This is hardly a triviality. If you are interested in a topic and you find a paper interesting, more often than not you are interested in reaching out to the author.
If a paper features a list of authors that outnumber the paper's pages 10-to-1, it's a major red flag, and it's quite plausible and expectable that 99%of the names in that list had zero input and might even have zero contribution to give to the topic. I'd even argue it's a kin to academic fraud.
By the way, the same goes for those researchers who work on paper mills, and manage to rake in production metrics that go well beyond an article per day.
Which itself not necessarily a sign of fraud: https://www.science.org/content/article/physics-paper-sets-r...
just click the link and it will show the others, this seems to be a limitation/UI feature of arxiv. The paper itself contains the full list
christ
all authors are listed. there is no conspiracy to hide authorship.
arxiv simply want to keep the page short not too long.
DSec is a good step in this direction!
I think around that time Grafana changed their license tho so you couldn't host OSS Grafana as part of your service.
it's just very efficient use of shared cores that is required to make these kinds of workloads cost efficient
This is an interesting problem from infra perspective since you cannot predict the workload. On a bigger scale you may get away with forecasts.
Im waiting for tech that elastically allocates cpu/mem without restarting a container.
I can't work out from the paper if the session can cross all 3 types of isolation (between persistence) but I'm assuming it can if it needs to evolve tool calling and security requirements.
In any case it feels like they're just composing and mangling technologies into a platform and not bringing much to the table (from what I've read so far; ie still using well established isolation tech and not something unexpected like a microkernel) but the outcomes are impressive
Native Chinese speakers to confirm....
Which cynics could say is marketing hype, but I tend to believe it's extremely difficult to build anything land/energy intensive in the modern United States
They want the legislature to keep their lead from other competitors.
Not sure they'd be the same without the constraints.
Still giving them credit because creating such as scheduler/platform from scratch is quite complex, and I know that they probably struggled a lot to get it right.
At a high level, agent sandboxes have peculiar needs. Agents are really bursty, but also long lived. You need low latency suspend/resume calls. Checkpointing and recovery have some particular considerations. And naive approaches are often really wasteful, but over optimizing without harming durability, isolation, or consistency in performance can get tricky.
This is the new hot infra topic for agent swarms, for the time being. Whether that's impressive or not is up to the reader I guess, but it's a pretty involved project nonetheless.
it also shows how much density you can get easily from a single core if you wanted to replicate this
Impressive numbers!
Whoever would have thought (in prior years) that in 2026 AI Agents (not people or corporations, at least not directly) seem to be (or seem to be rapidly becoming) the biggest consumers of cloud computing resources...
Anyway, a very interesting paper and environment!
Or they are just rushing to say anything, and it's much easier to comment on that than the content of the paper.
I wonder how those few that were left out feel :)
This doesn't mean anything partisan to me, but I mentally auto-classified what you said as a partisan argument, and reacted in a knee-jerk way. I'm happy that the comment you are responding to still made a best-faith argument to explore possible implications of what I said, and what you said.
But I want to draw a sharp line of what I want to discuss here, and failed at doing that. Open discussion of economy and politics is interesting to me. I don't consider myself a communist or socialist, neither a fierce "anti-leftist".
But my comment did invite exactly this polarization, and I'm thankful that despite of it, there was still a constructive follow-up comment.
Sorry for the blunder on my part: I simply skimmed your comment while distracted, instead of reading it, then reacted reflexively.
I'd myself be confused by the accusation I made ("yelling about socialism") would it have been thrown at me when simply discussing some geopolitical/economy topic.
A nice work perk is recognizing your teams accomplishments publicly. Give it a try. I hear even capitalists like to be treated as if they are human. Some dude named deming used to talk about workers pride. Sort of a smart guy I guess...
[1] https://cds.cern.ch/record/1471031
[2] https://impact.ornl.gov/en/publications/observation-of-a-new...