‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

What would a serious AI product look like?

176 points · 84 comments · lumpa

  1. ramity · · focus · HN ↗
    I'm very thankful for the section on reproducibility. I argue this is the single biggest hangup for the entire space. You CAN have temperature and determinism. I've been waiting for six years for a major provider to offer it, there is demand, but I've slowly come to realize the current game theory does not support it.

    For providers, not supporting deterministic eval means:

    - users use more tokens = more money

    - providers can generate more tokens per compute = more money

    - providers have cheaper hardware options (GPUs) = more money

    - providers models are harder to extract/distill = more money

    - providers are harder to hold liable for outputs = more money

    - providers can secretly use other models = more money

    - providers are harder to compare against others = more money

    - providers can cherry pick performance results = more money

    1. augment_me · · focus · HN ↗
      Very good points. Incentives are just terrible for this.

      Add in:

      - harder to audit

      - move cost of failure/reprompts to the user

      - kind of noted by you, but all kinds of quantization, model pruning, model routing, A/B testing becomes invisible and without any repercussions. The ways to cost-optimize are just crazy.

      IIRC Thinking Machines had a mode with deterministic numerics but it's more expensive to run due to limitations this imposes on cross-batch ops and ordering of floating point reductions, and their model is not great overall.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.