Thread

1. dcow · 1789828104 · focus · HN ↗

   I can understand why the author feels bitter but it still feels juvenile to me. Certainly both Jev and Laya are based on the research of countless prior papers and academics. Diogo decided to build a product out of the concept. The author didn't. Publishing research papers and model weights is probably part of the problem--it feels academic. If you look at the author's profile they focus on applying AI to healthcare. Not selling general AI type safety to AI pilled companies and devs. There's a big difference there. Whether that's good or bad you can argue all day. But for the author to expect otherwise is pretty weird. I do applaud them for not stewing too much on it and trying to do something about it, though.

   1. vessenes · 1789828866 · focus · HN ↗

      Agreed. Another difficulty here is there are not good benchmarks for this new architecture yet, so it’s easy to potshot and snipe, where jev seems to be pretty broadly intelligent/at least have had a lot of rl in different domains.

      We haven’t seen any of these copy cats play doom or street fighter for instance; just categorize email.

      I imagine once the author cools down and evaluates on a broad harness of tasks he may find that his new thing has a lot of engineering work ahead.

      1. hirako2000 · 1789831722 · focus · HN ↗

         The doom demo would have to be reproduced to confirm what their model is capable of. Oh but it's all closed source, so who knows.

         It reminds. Me of Devin. Took a while to debunk. Not saying Jev is a fraud , but the gap between structuring typed output and playing a game involving logical interpretation of frames made of pixels, screams unstructured interpretation they made and forgot to mention.

         1. derac · 1789832951 · focus · HN ↗

            They mention in their blog post that the model is working on text rather than pixels in the Doom demo.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.