Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

12gramsofcarbon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 315 posts

Re: Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

#131

Post by ambicapter »

> That’s no longer true. We’ve entered a different regime, where spending more tokens generally results in better results. We call this “compounding correctness” — the more tokens you spend on getting a task correct, the more likely you’ll get a good outcome. We talked about this a bit at the last in person Agentics meetup:

Have we? Is it generally the case that the more tokens you spend, you better results you get? This take is so weird I suspect author somehow financially benefits from tokenmaxxing.

Re: Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

#132

Post by jasondigitized »

cyphar wrote: post #50
SR2Z wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't understand this take. If you're a carpentry shop that just bought power tools for the first time and you're worried that your employees are sticking with hand tools because that's what they know, then you look for sawdust. The goal isn't to have people work at converting wood into sawdust, the point is that if you wanna see if the tools are working you wanna see proof they're actually being used. I'm s…

Why would a carpentry shop buy hundreds of thousands of dollars of power tools without consulting with their employees to see what they actually need to get their job done more effectively? The logic of buying the tools then forcing the employees to use them "or else" is completely backwards in any sane world. (Of course, we've all had bosses that went to some marketing seminar and come back having been tricked^Wsold…

Because Japanese hand tools are objectively less efficient than power tools in a carpentry shop. The guys that want to use hand tools can go work in a boutique that charges a premium for that level of craftsmanship. If you told them to use power tools, no amount of utility would convince them to use them, with most of their justification being psychological. Also, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

Re: Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

#133

Post by AussieWog93 »

cyphar wrote: post #50
SR2Z wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't understand this take. If you're a carpentry shop that just bought power tools for the first time and you're worried that your employees are sticking with hand tools because that's what they know, then you look for sawdust. The goal isn't to have people work at converting wood into sawdust, the point is that if you wanna see if the tools are working you wanna see proof they're actually being used. I'm s…

Why would a carpentry shop buy hundreds of thousands of dollars of power tools without consulting with their employees to see what they actually need to get their job done more effectively? The logic of buying the tools then forcing the employees to use them "or else" is completely backwards in any sane world. (Of course, we've all had bosses that went to some marketing seminar and come back having been tricked^Wsold…

>If you want to see if the tools work, why don't you just ask your employees? Like any normal employer would?

I run a small business with two employees.

N=2 here, of course, but one of them will experiment with any new process you introduce (as well as plenty more that you don't!)

The other will keep doing what he's always been doing, even if it's frustrating and inefficient, unless you monitor him and force him to use the new process.

I could imagine most "normal employers" would understand that both type of person exists and, assuming you're getting good first impressions from group A, it's usually better off in the long run to shove the new process down group B's throat.

(This isn't to say that the "Group B" employee is less valuable or anything - he is more conscientious and reliable than anyone else we've ever hired - but just that different people need different management styles)

Re: Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

#135

Post by moduspol »

ryandrake wrote: post #97
aurareturn wrote: post #2

Tokenmaxxing was just a way to force employees to start leveraging AI in a meaningful way. For companies that have measured performance based on token spend, they can now dial it back. Employees have learned to leverage AI for things they wouldn’t have prior. Now they know what’s possible and what’s not. No one is stupid enough to always measure performance based on token spend and have unlimited budget. It was alway…

> Management felt like employees weren't leveraging AI fast enough. If my productivity is in line with their expectations, I don’t understand why management cares what tools I’m using to do it. No employer ever told me to use emacs instead of vi, even though I’m 10x more productive in one vs the other. So why all of a sudden does management need to micromanage my tools?

Because they're reading blog posts and listening to podcasts that increase their expectations of what your output should be.

Re: Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

#136

Post by vineyardmike »

animuchan wrote: post #120
aurareturn wrote: post #2

Tokenmaxxing was just a way to force employees to start leveraging AI in a meaningful way. For companies that have measured performance based on token spend, they can now dial it back. Employees have learned to leverage AI for things they wouldn’t have prior. Now they know what’s possible and what’s not. No one is stupid enough to always measure performance based on token spend and have unlimited budget. It was alway…

This is probably the most charitable explanation humanly possible. Surely for this specific example of managerial stupidity it just is, but I mean more generally, it's a beautiful posting. I aspire to have this much misplaced belief in any humans at all, let alone CEOs.

At my company, this was the explicitly stated and shared goal from management.

"We can't know all the parts of our business that AI can do a good job automating [because it's so new] but we also don't want to be the last to know and outcompeted along the way. Please throw AI at random parts of your job [and we're tracking this] so we can generate feedback from employees on where to invest in additional automation"

My company has since provided a ton of high-value little AI workflows, alongside a handful that didn't pan out. AI-assisted software development is a major change overall, but the general business-process updates from AI are a net-positive to me.

Re: Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

#137

Post by NateEag »

ambicapter wrote: post #131

> That’s no longer true. We’ve entered a different regime, where spending more tokens generally results in better results. We call this “compounding correctness” — the more tokens you spend on getting a task correct, the more likely you’ll get a good outcome. We talked about this a bit at the last in person Agentics meetup: Have we? Is it generally the case that the more tokens you spend, you better results you get?…

> This take is so weird I suspect author somehow financially benefits from tokenmaxxing.

They might own a chunk of NVDA.

Re: Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

#138

Post by vineyardmike »

aurareturn wrote: post #121
theahura wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Independent of everything else, very interesting to see how polarized the comments are here

I'm a +26 on my post so far so it seems like there are a lot of people who agree with me but most replies disagree with me. I suppose this is the nature of online forums - that those who disagree will take the time to reply but those who agree rarely do.

FWIW I agree with you, but it doesn't add much to the conversation to leave a comment saying so.

I also agree with the comment you're replying to as well - the vitriol and anger, along with the "this is just another blockchain bubble" type relies is really interesting. It's so surprising to see the variety of (negative) replies and beliefs people have, along with the general distaste/distrust for management. I guess it's also largely a sign of the times since a lot of ICs probably have a ton of anxiety about their career.

Re: Tokenmaxxing is dead, long live tokenmaxxing

#139

Post by Sharlin »

qntmfred wrote: post #43
aurareturn wrote: post #2

Tokenmaxxing was just a way to force employees to start leveraging AI in a meaningful way. For companies that have measured performance based on token spend, they can now dial it back. Employees have learned to leverage AI for things they wouldn’t have prior. Now they know what’s possible and what’s not. No one is stupid enough to always measure performance based on token spend and have unlimited budget. It was alway…

might be the first time I've seen this reasonable and obviously correct interpretation of the last 6-12 months so directly and unapologetically stated. bravo

It does not seem obviously correct to me.
Post reply on HN