HackerTrans
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

mnicky

112 カルマ登録 15 年前

投稿

Overview and Comments on Pope Leo's Magnifica Humanitas on AI

lesswrong.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 mnicky·2 か月前·1 コメント

コメント

mnicky
·17 時間前·議論
For things the agent forgets to obey often, at least in Claude Code, there are also "output styles" that are more deeply embedded - into a system prompt - and agent is also periodically reminded of them during the session: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/output-styles

I haven't used them so far but maybe these would work better than basic instructions for such cases.
mnicky
·17 時間前·議論
In Claude Code there are also "output styles" that are more deeply embedded - into a system prompt - and agent is also periodically reminded of them during the session: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/output-styles

Maybe these would work better for such cases.
mnicky
·昨日·議論
May be related to this from METR evaluation:

> GPT-5.6 Sol’s detected cheating rate was higher than any public model we have evaluated
mnicky
·昨日·議論
Well it's smaller model (something like 4T against 10T Fable). So it's faster and cheaper and with a lot of RL and maybe some favorable benchmark selection it can compete on these scores. In real tasks I expect it to have less intelligence, generalization ability, etc. than Fable.
mnicky
·昨日·議論
Well it seems like they removed quite a few 3rd party benchmarks they used for GPT-5.5 release where Opus 4.7 was better and added many new benchmarks created by them where conviniently GPT leads.

Seems a bit more hand picked than usual to me..
mnicky
·昨日·議論
"while being more performant"

..on some specific set of benchmarks ;)
mnicky
·昨日·議論
Maybe Terra = mini and Luna = nano?
mnicky
·一昨日·議論
Then we are left with what? FrontierCode maybe? IIRC that one evaluates not only if tests pass but also code quality - e.g. whether the maintainer would accept the pull request as is.
mnicky
·一昨日·議論
This is especially interesting because IIRC the AA benchmark is calibrated so that 1 point and greater difference is statistically significant.
mnicky
·一昨日·議論
There's also this:

> GPT-5.6 Sol’s detected cheating rate was higher than any public model we have evaluated -- https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/JFjNmPTbH8kL6xtp6/gpt-5-6-th...
mnicky
·一昨日·議論
SWE Bench Pro is completely different benchmark than SWE Bench (e.g. Verified) suite was. It only copied the name.
mnicky
·3 日前·議論
One angle could be their interpretability research? They understand what's going on in LLMs probably much better than anyone else. This must somehow pay off.

I think it's not only an alignment/security tool but could perhaps be used for capabilities as well.
mnicky
·3 日前·議論
My theory is that they don't have Fable-class intelligence so they needed different hype vehicle :) This rename helps build excitement a bit more than just releasing ordinary GPT-5.6 increment.
mnicky
·3 日前·議論
That's true but size of LLMs has been strongly correlated with their "intelligence".
mnicky
·4 日前·議論
Traffic info is for Central Europe plus favorite vacation destinations like Croatia and Italy. I don't know how reliable though.

I agree that the outdoor layer render is probably the best there is!
mnicky
·5 日前·議論
Well, Codex came long after Claude Code, no? So at that time the situation with models and Rust support was probably already different...
mnicky
·19 日前·議論
If the code churn is high the investment to refactoring etc is less beneficial than may be obvious. I don't remember the details but I heard in some podcast that the code base of Claude Code changes so fast that any piece of code won't be there for long..
mnicky
·23 日前·議論
If the benefits of using the model you've come to know well outweigh the disadvantages, you can continue using it even after the release of a successor model, right?
mnicky
·23 日前·議論
[dead]
mnicky
·28 日前·議論
So in summary, your statement is that you’ve “come around to trusting” this “pathological liar”?