Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

goodfire.ai

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#21

I am skeptical of generic sparsification efforts. After all, companies like Neural Magic spent years trying to make it work, only to pivot to 'vLLM' engine and be sold to Red Hat

Link shows this isn't sparsity as in inference speed, it's spare autoencoders, as in interpreting the features in an LLM (SAE anthropic as a search term will explain more)

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#22
post #18
post #15

This is the ultimate propaganda machine, no? We’re social creatures, chatbots already act as friends and advisors for many people. Seems like a pretty good vector for a social attack.

The more the public has access to these tools, the more they'll develop useful scar tissue and muscle memory. We need people to be constantly exposed to bots so that they understand the new nature of digital information. When the automobile was developed, we had to train kids not to play in the streets. We didn't put kids or cars in bubbles. When photoshop came out, we developed a vernacular around edited images. "Ph…

Right. You know how your grandmother falls for those “you have a virus” popups but you don’t? That’s because society adapts to the challenges of the day. I’m sure our kids and grandchildren will be more immune to these new types of scams.

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#24
post #9
post #7

nice work. enjoyed the zoomable UMAP. i wonder if there are hparams to recluster the UMAP in interesting ways. after the idea that Claude 3.5 Sonnet used SAEs to improve its coding ability i'm not sure if i'm aware of any actual practical use of them yet beyond Golden Gate Claude (and Golden Gate Gemma ( https://x.com/swyx/status/1818711762558198130 ) has anyone tried out Anthropic's matching SAE API yet? wondering h…

Thank you! I think some of the features we have like conditional steering make SAEs a lot more convenient to use. It also makes using models a lot more like conventional programming. For example, when the model is 'thinking' x, or the text is about y, then invoke steering. We have an example of this for jailbreak detection: https://x.com/GoodfireAI/status/1871241905712828711 We also have an 'autosteer' feature that m…

sure but as you well know classifying sentiment analysis is a BERT-scale problem, not really an SAE problem. burden of proof is on you that "read features out and train classifiers on them" is superior to "GOFAI".

anyway i dont need you to have the answers right now. congrats on launching!

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#25
post #18
post #15

This is the ultimate propaganda machine, no? We’re social creatures, chatbots already act as friends and advisors for many people. Seems like a pretty good vector for a social attack.

The more the public has access to these tools, the more they'll develop useful scar tissue and muscle memory. We need people to be constantly exposed to bots so that they understand the new nature of digital information. When the automobile was developed, we had to train kids not to play in the streets. We didn't put kids or cars in bubbles. When photoshop came out, we developed a vernacular around edited images. "Ph…

Your analogies don't quite align with this technology.

We've had exposure to propaganda and disinformation for many decades, long before the internet became their primary medium, yet people don't learn to become immune to them. They're more effective now than they've ever been, and AI tools will only make them more so. Arguing that more exposure will somehow magically solve these problems is delusional at best, and dangerous at worst.

There are other key differences from past technologies:

- Most took years to decades to develop and gain mass adoption. This time is critical for society and governments to adapt to them. This adoption rate has been accelerating, but modern AI tech development is particularly fast. Governments can barely keep up to decide how this should be regulated, let alone people. When you consider that this tech is coming from companies that pioneered the "move fast and break things" mentality, in an industry drunk on greed and hubris, it should give everyone a cause for concern.

- AI has the potential to disrupt many industries, not just one. But further than that, it raises deep existential questions about our humanity, the value of human work, how our economic and education systems are structured, etc.

These are not problems we can solve overnight. Turning a blind eye to them and vouching for less regulations and more exposure is simply irresponsible.

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#26
post #16
post #2

I'm one of the authors of this paper - happy to answer any questions you might have.

Noob question - how do we know that these autoencoders aren't hallucinating and really are mapping/clustering what they should be?

Hmm the hallucination would happen in the auto labelling, but we review and test our labels and they seem correct!

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#29
post #18
post #15

This is the ultimate propaganda machine, no? We’re social creatures, chatbots already act as friends and advisors for many people. Seems like a pretty good vector for a social attack.

The more the public has access to these tools, the more they'll develop useful scar tissue and muscle memory. We need people to be constantly exposed to bots so that they understand the new nature of digital information. When the automobile was developed, we had to train kids not to play in the streets. We didn't put kids or cars in bubbles. When photoshop came out, we developed a vernacular around edited images. "Ph…

Counter point the number of supposedly educated people falling into social media echo chambers parroting partisan views, sharing on ramps, recommending supplements. They obviously do not see the harm, if fact they feel superior, feeling the need to educate and lecture. The vector here was social media, the vector here is reliance on chatbots. I mildly trust the big player like Anthropic and even OpenAI, but imagine the talking head influencers/supplement peddlers making and promoting a un-woke chatbot. People are already relying on chatgpt to navigate medical conditions, personal/relationship issues

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#30
post #25
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more the public has access to these tools, the more they'll develop useful scar tissue and muscle memory. We need people to be constantly exposed to bots so that they understand the new nature of digital information. When the automobile was developed, we had to train kids not to play in the streets. We didn't put kids or cars in bubbles. When photoshop came out, we developed a vernacular around edited images. "Ph…

Your analogies don't quite align with this technology. We've had exposure to propaganda and disinformation for many decades, long before the internet became their primary medium, yet people don't learn to become immune to them. They're more effective now than they've ever been, and AI tools will only make them more so. Arguing that more exposure will somehow magically solve these problems is delusional at best, and d…

> vouching for less regulations and more exposure is simply irresponsible.

We let people buy 6,000 pound vehicles capable of traveling 100+ mph.

We let people buy sharp knives and guns. And heat their homes with flammable gas. And hike up dangerous tall mountains.

I think the LLM is the least of society's worries and this pervasive thinking that everything needs to be wrapped up in bubble wrap is what is actually dangerous.

Can a thought be dangerous? Should we prevent people from thinking or being exposed to certain things? That sounds far more Orwellian.

If you want to criminalize illegal use of LLMs for fraud, then do that. But don't make the technology inaccessible and patronize people by telling them they're not smart enough to understand the danger.

This is not a "fragile world" technology in its current form. When they're embodied, walking around, and killing people, then you can sound the alarm.

Post reply on HN