[D] Why does it seem like open source materials on ML are incomplete? this is no

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>I’ve been thinking about the current state of machine learning PhDs, including my own work, and I’d like to hear how others see it.<br /> My

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>I've been using AI extensively for ML research, and I've noticed a bottleneck: brainstorming research directions and generating smoke run

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>I’m trying to understand why models from major labs (GPT, Claude, etc.) dominate real-world usage? You might say it's due to the expensive

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Ps. Not pitching anything; Just trying to understand where reality differs from the narrative</p> <p>We're a couple of ML students, mostly worked

<table> <tr><td> <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1t5p2yv/the_gb10_solution_atlas_is_now_open_source_the/"> <img alt="The GB10 Solution Atlas is now open

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>I’ve been thinking about the current AGI discussions, especially the debate between scaling language models and building embodied systems.</p>

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>I think the name of the model, mythOS, heavily implies they plan to open source this model soon, including the weights and the training dataset.

<table> <tr><td> <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1t6vy7j/the_80_billion_backlog_q1_2026_showed_ai_demand/"> <img alt="The $80 Billion Backlog: Q1 2026 Showed AI