Would love to collaborate with you on this since we’re building something analogous internally.
7,200 karma · joined January 30, 2017
◮ Website @ www.sebmellen.com
◮ Blog @ www.sebastianmellen.com
◮ Email @ hn [ a t ] sebastianmellen [ d o t ] com // corp email is first name at mycompanysite
——————————
There is a tide in the affairs of men. Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; Omitted, all the voyage of their life Is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat, And we must take the current when it serves, Or lose our ventures.
——————————
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/sebmellen; my proof: https://keybase.io/sebmellen/sigs/iwp1glP0DaEmYMDaW9pg2Syr_Kq5YULKX7AU68ovLCQ ]
iWIkiiKk7w
“What data was affected
- Personal data: name, CPF (Brazilian taxpayer ID), email address, and date of birth;
- Data related to the guarantee payment: information about the taxes withheld from the payment and about the distribution channel through which the guaranteed investment was made at the liquidated institution”
…doesn’t this mean Zuckerberg himself?
Retooling thought to be delivery-oriented is very difficult.
His launch post gives good context not found in the blog:
> interpretability might be the most important scientific problem in the world right now, as I don't think we can solve alignment if we don't know what we're building. I think I have good news about it. I co-authored early work in mechanistic interpretability at OpenAI and came away pessimistic, because neural networks appeared to fold into arbitrary tangled knots. years later, I started openai's first large-scale automated interpretability project, finding about 2% of neurons legible with the primitive tools we had
> with modern agentic tools and a much closer look, the picture looks totally different. the vast majority in models up to trillions of parameters are legible, and their circuits beautiful. many famous examples of tangled neurons turned out to be misunderstood. The roadblocks I expected mostly aren't there. I now think ambitious interpretability will be solved by the time we need it most, and possibly quite soon, as automated scientists keep improving. it may be a bitter lesson for interpretability: the simple thing, at absurd scale, works
Wow, those are seriously impressive numbers for how intelligent this model seems to be!
One thing that this article doesn't clarify, and that I guess I really should look into, is what exactly AutomationBench tests for as compared to other benchmarks. The standout performance on AutomationBench is interesting to see, but I don't know what it really means because the model seems to score relatively close to other local models on every other benchmark.
But you're right that you can't be 100% certain. Isn't that true for human-to-human explanations too?
But, as a patient, it's hard to find comfort in that. I think that might be what drives the craziness in “non-traditional” approaches to treating disease. Could it be that people using fruititarian diets and essential oils for cancer are doing so because they don’t understand enough to bear a “wait and see” situation?
Argon explained the problem to me in such depth that I could be content with my basic treatment plan. ChatGPT went way off the deep end, suggesting things like high-dose niacinamide treatment (which is admittedly being evaluated in clinical trials, but comes with a host of other side effects).
As an example, I recently had an OCT scan of my retina because I'm a “glaucoma suspect.” I'm a glaucoma suspect because I have an unusually high cup-to-disc ratio, which is a pattern typically seen in glaucomatous patients.
As part of this OCT scan, you get a report back on your RNFL, which is basically a report on the health and thickness of your optic nerve(s) and retina(s). (Dramatically oversimplifying, of course.)
My ophthalmologist struggled to explain my OCT scan results to me and instead sort of shrugged and said, "It's probably because you're a high myope, but we'll keep you coming in once a year.”
But my scans look horrifically bright red — meaning I'm in less than the first percentile of retinal thickness for my age. Obviously concerning enough to do my own research…
ChatGPT 6 Pro and Opus 5.5 have struggled to make any sense of the clinical implications of these scans. In contrast, Argon was the first model to:
1. explain how the OCT machine works
2. detail the physiological mechanism that causes the cupping and thinner RNFL layers in my scenario
3. sum it up into a clinical recommendation (similar to what my ophthalmologist recommended, with the addition of basic supplementation and lifestyle modification changes)
4. provide an interactive visualization of the topography of my eye vs a glaucomatic eye: https://optic-nerve-3d.netlify.app/
I'm blown away.
I think one thing I'm struggling to understand is the underlying compute model and how it works. If you compare yourself to a cloud like AWS or a Neocloud platform like, say, Railway or Fly.io, what are you doing differently?
Look at one of their examples of an initial prompt: https://github.com/openai/math/blob/main/reasoning_traces/re...
Thanks for the heads up!
[0]: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6711174
[1]: https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/tools/sbdb_lookup.html#/?sstr=20031...