Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | acepl's commentslogin

What is the probability that two customers will have exactly the same tokens in cache? Wouldnt it require using the exact same CLAUDE.md, skills, MCPs and context? After that it is even worse since the nondeterminism of LLMs and humans


I suspect what GP is getting at is there will be a strong incentive to implement some structural sharing across tenants to avoid redundantly storing the same tokens over and over. At least I'd be tempted to do this if I was working with a very precious, constrained resource (e.g. VRAM). Doing this correctly seems.. very difficult. [edit] To answer your question directly: the probability that the entire cache is identical between two different users is very low, but the probability that there exists identical chunks of cache between two different users is very high. Exploiting those commonalities successfully will significantly compress the data.


Agree with this and I have been thinking about it recently as well. I think you could implement a cord-like vocabulary to identify large duplicated substrings for exact deduplication and pairwise correlations or vocabulary profiles/small classifiers for forward-looking or speculative deduplications. A clear example is the GPL license, it’s a large substring you might encounter often and highly likely to be accompanied by lots of c code.

This is probably something that you’d be doing on the CPU though before sending anything to the GPU, though that’s definitely the sensitive surface since it’s hardware without good multitenancy. I assume the interface between the CPU and GPU is where you would be most likely to make a mistake where you start decoding data from one fd that was meant for another, or from the wrong position, and get someone else’s data.

I wouldn’t be confident that these are active exploits from deliberately abusing kv cache optimizations though, possibly just the kind of bugs you get from active low level performance tuning/systems work. Since this is something I have seen across providers lately I personally suspect it to be a driver issue.


Given the size of the datacenter class GPUs they're running these models on, don't they need to be processing multiple tenants concurrently per GPU to extract the full potential of the hardware?

I agree, shuffling the data between the CPU and GPU is itself fraught with peril. It's all the hairiest distributed systems problems combined with the sketchiest memory safety issues all in one place.


System prompt for something like Claude Code should be identical, no?


Could just be a bug in the radix tree for the KVCache with deeper, wrong, levels of the trie returning for the same initial prefix match.


Not only that, but thy need to have the same tokens at the same time? I just can't see how likely this is.


Oh yes, we do not need programmers any more…


50% unemployment :D


it’s the wet dream of execs and pm types. however, i have not seen anything close to it in my life. I remember the UML days, lol. the issue is not the code, it’s the translation layer between business and code. maybe someday ai bridges that gap. history has shown probably not


"Coding is largely solved"


The funny thing is at my current employer, they mentioned that "coding is increasingly becoming a solved problem" and in the same breath, mentioned that one project was too hard for anyone to do so they're not doing it and would rather sell existing features...


Weird. Coding isn’t really “solved” - because “coding” isn’t just the process of typing in characters as fast as possible - BUT the skill floor has been massively lowered while also raising the skill ceiling considerably.

We’re doing projects now that seemed impossible before because we have access to these powerful AI models. They can make things that would have taken weeks or months take days now, freeing up time for even more ambitious buildouts we never would’ve even considered before.


While abused by LLM vendors, that phrase in one form or another I've been hearing since the early '00s and it's likely way older.


Sure but have you ever seen it actually play out in practice like it currently is? Whether or not it's true (of course it's not) people are currently behaving as if it is and firing/hiring accordingly.


Well, when was the last time you wrote machine code by hand?

... but then they went and changed what coding meant.

We've always been layering abstractions on top of abstractions. If we get to an abstraction that works well enough that you no longer have to dive down into the previous layer, we say we've solved coding, and change what coding means. Obviously LLMs aren't there yet.


I love that quote, especially considering the insane amount of bugs that are produced. It’s as easy to debunk as someone claiming ”I can jump to the moon”.


"This thing isn't 100% perfect, contrary to what absolutely no one anywhere said at any time"


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: