No HTTPS in 2026. False origin that suggest a massive improvement. Leaderboard doesn't work. Instructions are "repeatedly download this code and execute it on your machine". No way to see the actual changes being made.

We can do better than this as an industry, or at least we used to be better at this. Where's the taste?

I was exploring how to parallelize autoresearch workers. The idea is to have a trusted pool of workers who can verify contributions from a much larger untrusted pool. It's backed bit a naked git repo and a sqlite with a simple go server. It's a bit like block chain in that blocks = commits, proof of work = finding a lower val_bpb commit, and reward = place on the leaderboard. I wouldn't push the analogy too far. It's something I'm experimenting with but I didn't release it yet (except for briefly) because it's not sufficiently simple/canonical. The core problem is how to neatly and in a general way organize individual autoresearch threads into swarms, inspired by SETI@Home, or Folding@Home, etc.

So, if I understand correctly, this is about finding the optimal (or at least a better one) GPT architecture?

Anyway, "1980 experiments, 6 improvements" makes me wonder if this is better than a random search or some simple heuristic.

I'm not the OP, though it seems the context for this is (via @esotericpigeon):

https://github.com/karpathy/autoresearch/pull/92

Seems like a shameless rip of the below, theme and all?

https://www.ensue-network.ai/autoresearch

I'm curious what a "stripped down version" of Github can offer in terms of functionality that Github does not? Is it not simpler to have the agents register as Github repos since the infrastructure is already in place?

You guys really gonna copy and paste a prompt to your Claude CLI which may or may not be setup sandbox/tools permissions