<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Latency on Dr. Hitesh Sarda</title>
		<link>https://hitesh.in/tags/latency/</link>
		<description>Recent content in Latency on Dr. Hitesh Sarda</description>
		<generator>Hugo</generator>
		<language>en-US</language>
		
		
		
		
			<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
			<atom:link href="https://hitesh.in/tags/latency/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
			<item>
				<title>Why the smartest model can make your product worse</title>
				<link>https://hitesh.in/2026/smartest-model-worse-product/</link>
				<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<guid>https://hitesh.in/2026/smartest-model-worse-product/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;Yesterday OpenAI shipped &lt;a href=&#34;https://simonwillison.net/2026/Jul/9/gpt-5-6/&#34;&gt;GPT-5.6&lt;/a&gt;, a family of three models with a record score on a coding benchmark and a 1.5 million token context window. The feeds did what they always do: everyone raced to re-rank their tools against the new frontier. The most useful AI story I read this week was not about any of that. It was a reading-tutor startup explaining how it &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.ello.com/blog/teaching-a-child-in-1000-ms&#34;&gt;teaches a child in under a second&lt;/a&gt;, and it quietly makes the case that most teams are optimising the wrong number.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
