This should work without logging in: https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1x7g3zq/china_p...
1,450 karma · joined February 20, 2017
Authentication Stuff: hnchat.com:0m9YzMwf4kdLeEnrHt2n 547e7b5026bc47ac8302bf3d213909be [ my public key: https://keybase.io/supermdguy; my proof: https://keybase.io/supermdguy/sigs/fHS654nzPCSpfpoOPNrHUJrgc2jOy21zNsnFwyeLDfs ]
This should work without logging in: https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1x7g3zq/china_p...
AP article: https://apnews.com/article/china-export-restrictions-ai-chip...
What's difficult, is I now spend most of my time on these high-throughput tasks, where my brain isn't exactly off, but focused on quantity over quality. It's often difficult to identify when a task requires "real" brain-power, and when it does, it adds a lot of friction to dig into the code and orient myself. So it's hard to know when it's the right time to do that.
Funny to read this in the wake of the HuggingFace hack. I'm sure this is based on a clean run, but I can't help thinking PHASEONE[big] would be proud.
https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/artificial-analysi...
I don't have any insider info, but if model sizes actually have increased exponentially since GPT 4.1, there's an argument to be made that there are diminishing returns in scaling pretraining alone.
Also interesting thing I haven't noticed before, Opus models have followed a really consistent linear improvement, while it looks like OpenAI struggled with base model performance until 5.5/5.6 (EDIT - 5.5 was their first new pretraining run in over a year).
Curious if anyone's tried using RL for harness engineering? I think we're still pretty far away from the optimal harness, especially when it comes to long-context memory management.
- automatically fixing simple CI failures
- getting production alerts and automatically creating RCAs and a fix PR
- periodically checking slow DB queries and finding ways to speed them up.
- creating charts to answer one-off questions about our data
I've tried using it as an on-the-go coding agent as well, but found I prefer more interactive agents, so I can see what the code looks like.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-cause-of-autism-research...
Code. It’s called code.”
- CommitStrip (https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/1p70bk8/sp...)
I think if you’re doing it right, the core of your code should be the simplest expression of the underlying business logic. Of course there’s always going to be supporting layers, and maybe those don’t need to be reviewed. But if you haven’t read the code, there’s an extent to which you don’t know the business logic.
This is really exciting. I work on voice AI, and we're still using 4.1/4.1 mini since none of the frontier models come close on latency. I'm excited to be able to have more interactive experiences, I think it'll unlock new ways of working with these models.
I think you’re right that changing its own harness would be bad and skew towards prompt engineering instead of learned behavior. So maybe instead it could start with a harness with memory CRUD tools and then learn how to most effectively use them.