‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Fable 5 – Median thinking declined in August

428 points · 293 comments · espeed

  1. talon8635 · · focus · HN ↗
    Could there be a benefit to releasing a new model, slowly dumbing it down over a couple months, then releasing a new model that’s marginally if at all better than the original to create a perceived improvement when in reality there isn’t really one?

    For an industry that’s stagnant in progress yet relies on new frequent releases to survive (non-progress being an existential risk), this could make sense.

    I have no idea if that’s what’s happened, I completely pulled it out of my butt. And I have no idea is the actual frontier is stagnating.

    1. mrandish · · focus · HN ↗
      > to create a perceived improvement

      In addition to the dozens of opaque model parameters and hardware variables that can nerf or buff model intelligence, speed and profit, there's also the very real possibility that models aren't just training on benchmarks but could be evaluating if they are being benchmarked in real-time and applying more resources adaptively. 'Driver optimizations' that detected benchmarks in real-time were deployed in the first 'GPU Wars'.

      > I have no idea is the actual frontier is stagnating.

      Like a lot of complex, rapidly evolving tech, the truth is it's probably rapidly accelerating on some measures for a few and stagnating on many others for most - hence the divergence in user reports. It's depends on how you use it, for what problems, how rigorously you assess the output and whether you happen to be on a server bank, RAM pool or shard at this moment which hasn't yet been sufficiently 'cost optimized' by the margin algorithms. They don't call them load balancers anymore. They're Margin Balancers.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.