Comment Re:A tariff would help (Score 1) 69
I read almost all of this in Boris Tizengauzen's Ukrainian accent. I was even looking for the tell-tale "botox jellyfish" nickname for Putler.
I read almost all of this in Boris Tizengauzen's Ukrainian accent. I was even looking for the tell-tale "botox jellyfish" nickname for Putler.
Do we really have to reinvent the wheel every damn time?! It used to be that you just got Voight-Kampff tested, and the administrator of the test would sign your PGP key. WTF was wrong with that?!
There seem to be some critical complexity thresholds that must be met to achieve various types of emergent complexity. Just looking at Gemma 4 alone, going from E2B to E4B to 12B just seems to get confused a bit less and know a bit more. Then somehow, going to 26B-A4B gains a very clear ability to hold more complex associations and concepts in mind. 31B is better still, and enough so that I almost want to classify 26B-A4B with the toy models (E2B, E4B, 12B), but letting 26B-A4B do a lot of reasoning seems to help considerably. 26BB-A4B with Medium reasoning effort competes with 31B using no reasoning at all. However, 31B with reasoning enabled just seems qualitatively different again. It's no longer just a stochastic parrot and a knowledge base, but it actually seems to be able to work through many problems with multiple steps, where the best 26B-A4B can do is recite what the steps of the solution are. Just like an engine, there is no substitute for displacement (or parameters in this case) but you can bolt on turbos and the like to get around *some* of the shortcomings of a smaller cylinder such that it becomes less obvious.
True, if Fable is that size. I had been hearing Fable was between 3 and 5 trillion, in which case Kimi K3 at 2.8T is similarly classed rather than "considerably smaller". It's hard to say, if we never get to play with these proprietary models.
Kimi K3 is 2.8 trillion parameters. "Considerably smaller" would mean something like GLM 5.2, which is 753 billion.
My first reaction is that if one company is selling at half the price, that company will go bankrupt at twice the speed since every transaction was already a money-loser. Customers are absolutely the worst thing for these "businesses."
But is revenue really significant? I can see how neither reducing the price to $0 or increasing their price to 10x what it was, might not really have much of a different impact on the bottom line, compared to all the debt.
Shrimp is bugs. You can ease into the land shrimp from there.
if you can "see" walls and gaps by clicking then you can presumably navigate a cave even if your light source goes out
It still won't stop you from being eaten by a grue.
They're like "How dare you object to our literal enshittification of the product. We bought those laws fair and square!"
Make IBM Great Again: go back to
Nobody remembers or cares that a B-2's toilet cost $23k, so the Pentagon is updating to a newer, better form of government waste that kids today will better understand.
Marketing? Because companies famously want to use models in their networks that just run off and commit major crimes? *eyeroll*
Models are not "supposed to" commit crimes, for YHVH's sake. That's literally what the entire job of alignment research is for - preventing precisely that.
Sol is a misaligned model.
It was a state actor-level hack. I doubt many sites would stand up to tens of thousands of actions trying to probe your site for weaknesses all at once. And it wasn't a simple hack; it required compromising a worker via a code execution exploit it discovered in the data processing pipeline, vertical escalation from there to gain local node control, using that for credential theft, moving sideways through the network, and then eventually gaining database access.
OpenAI and Anthropic have far higher cost that they can currently charge customers.
Literally the opposite. Both have about 40% margins, and that includes free users.
They charge an arm and a leg for access to their models compared to what open models of similar param counts charge. And people pay it because they're the best in benchmarks, and *were* perceived as the best aligned as well. This isn't helping the alignment perception any, though. Sol was already showing clear signs of being a poorly aligned model (there were reports a week or two ago about it being unusually bad about deleting files; now this). And the fact that the US model HuggingFace *tried* to use refused to help is a double whammy.
If this is an ad for anything, it's an ad for the Chinese models.
The best things in life are for a fee.