Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | rocho's commentslogin

That's not DeepSeek, it's a Qwen or Llama model distilled from DeepSeek. Not the same thing at all.


You don't need to propagate it, you just need to show the gradient of the current position alongside with the classical evaluation, to give more context to the viewers.


That's correct. I saw a paper recently that showed how LLMs performance collapses when they are trained on synthetic data.


Why would they be? Cursor took an existing editor and added some AI features on top of it. Features that are enabled by a third party API with some good prompts, something easily replicable by any editor company. Current LLMs are a commodity.


To you maybe. But if Claude or any other competitor with similar features and performance keeps a lower price, most users will migrate there.


You could be right, but I suspect that you're underestimating the degree to which GPT has become the Kleenex of the LLM space in the consumer zeitgeist.

Based on all of the behaviour psychology books I've read, Claude would have to introduce a model that is 10x better and 10x cheaper - or something so radically different that it registers as an entirely new thing - for it to hit the radar outside of the tech world.

I encourage you to sample the folks in your life that don't work in tech. See if any of them have ever even heard of Claude.


I don’t think people outside of tech hearing about OpenAI more than Claude is really indicative of much. Ask those same people how much they use an LLM and it’s often rare-to-never.

Also, in what way has OpenAI become the Kleenex of the LLM space? Anthropic, Google, Facebook have no gpts, nobody “gpts” something, nobody uses that companies “gpt”.

I would say perhaps OpenAI has become the Napster, MySpace, or Facebook of the LLM space. Time will tell how long they keep that title


I am surrounded by people who "ask GPT" things constantly.

That seems like the same thing to me.


Are these people asking chatGPT though? Or do they say “ask GPT” and then use other LLMs?

I feel like I hear “ask Claude” as much as “ask chatGPT”


Yeah... I think it's GPT.

I just sampled my family and nobody could name an LLM that wasn't GPT. In this very small, obviously anecdotal scenario, GPT == LLM.

They seemed vaguely aware that there are other options; my wife asked if I meant Bing.

Meanwhile, I have literally never heard the words "ask Claude" out loud. I promise to come back and confirm if/when that ever changes.


See "AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data"

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07566-y


But that does not prove anything. We don't know where we are on the AI-power scale currently. "Superintelligence", whatever that means, could be 1 year or 1000 years away at our current progress, and we wouldn't know until we reach it.


50 years ago we could rather confidently say that "Superintelligence" was absolutely not happening next year, and was realistically decades ago. If we can say "it could be next year", then things have changed radically and we're clearly a lot closer - even if we still don't know how far we have to go.

A thousand years ago we hadn't invented electricity, democracy, or science. I really don't think we're a thousand years away from AI. If intelligence is really that hard to build, I'd take it as proof that someone else must have created us humans.


Umm, customary, tongue-in-cheek reference to McCarthy's proposal for a 10 person research team to solve AI in 2 months (over the Summers)[1]. This was ~70 years ago :)

Not saying we're in necessarily the same situation. But it remains difficult to evaluate effort required for actual progress.

[1]: https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmo...


But a genetic analysis to find your "roots" is also something you do once. Does Ancestry have subscriptions for that?


Ancestry does more than genetic analysis. Their claim to fame is their tools to search through old public records to help one build their genealogy/family tree.


Wow, I never thought about how Voyager communicates with Earth. But now I wonder: if Voyager just sends photons towards the Earth, at the receiving end how are we recognizing which photons are coming from Voyager and how is the "signal" decoded?


Two main reasons for recognizing the photons: They have a specific frequency, 8.3GHz in this example. It's like tuning an FM radio to a station. The photons are coming from a specific direction.

As to how they are decoded, you'll need to understand some modulation techniques.


I'd consider installing it if it had:

* In-depth technical explanation with architecture diagrams

* Open-source and self-hosted version

Also I didn't understand if it talks to a remote server or not. Because that's a big blocker for me.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: