Live data from Hacker News

Fable and the end of the free lunch

dbreunig.com

181–190 of 268 posts

Re: Fable and the end of the free lunch

#182
post #172
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was using ChatGPT voice during cooking to reflect on variations of a dishes i was preparing for years. It was so amazing to get advices and reflect that it struck me : I could use this model forever - it’s clever enough to help me tons and do lot of work for me - even if ai would stop evolving I would love it

As long as these models constantly keep switching up things like the temperatures at which a steak will be medium rare or at which temperature to season cast iron, you will never be able to trust them for cooking. My mother ruined a nice waterfowl for Christmas by listening to Gemini. And this is inherent to how LLMs work.

Not if you let your LLM grounds its truth in established facts. Otherwise they would be useless for programming for example.

Re: Fable and the end of the free lunch

#183

A few months ago folks were understandably annoyed when Microsoft dropped their heavily subsidized per-request pricing model because it was figuratively burning cash. Well, I'm here to tell you that whatever is going on behind the scenes at Cursor with this Space-X acquisition in the works, the Auto setting is clearly routing all prompts through "Cursor Grok 4.6 High" right now. This is a degree of subsidy that makes…

Giving Elon cash seems still wrong to me.

Re: Fable and the end of the free lunch

#184

>> GLM 5.2 is worth focusing on. It came out the same week as Fable and is roughly 1/9th the cost (and ~1/5th the cost of Opus 5). Is GLM 1/9th the quality of Fable? Perhaps, for certain classes of tasks. But for most rote coding it’s more than sufficient. Especially when provided with great context. I frequently chat with Fable to interrogate and shape a design, before handing off a brief to GLM. People say stuff li…

[flagged]

Re: Fable and the end of the free lunch

#185
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can compare the human brain and LLMs on a bunch of capabilities today, and see how we compare. By my reckoning: - LLMs have better long term memory (they know more than any human) and more working memory (LLMs have fast, uniform access to their whole context window). - LLMs are faster than we are. - Humans have online learning (we can do simultaneous learning and inference), giving us advantages in many no…

Because LLMs don't understand anything. That's the tech. They can only predict what they have been trained with and fail daily at the most basic tasks. Granted they can do amazing things, no question there. But they are not "smart". For example, it seems that even at Fable scale, simple concepts like the passage of time or (gasp) timezones elude them. I live in UTC+10 and with any RFC8339 data LLMs are constantly con…

> Because LLMs don't understand anything.

How do you square that then? They can do amazing things, but they're also not smart? Do you think its possible to solve Erdos problems without any "smarts"? Can you do it without even understanding mathematics?

I find it very hard to hold the idea that LLMs don't understand anything. They can explain concepts, translate them, simplify them and implement them in code. From the outside, LLMs seem to understands most concepts better than most humans do. Do you understand anything? Couldn't I make the same argument? How would you prove that you understand what a for loop is, or that you know what calculus is? I assume you'd demonstrate your knowledge by using a for loop in a program, or explain calculus back to me. But LLMs can do that too.

> For example, it seems that even at Fable scale, simple concepts like the passage of time or (gasp) timezones elude them.

Funny example, because lots of human struggle with this too. The number of meetings I've had with people in the US! "Lets meet on thursday morning australia time!". Only, they actually meant thursday night US time, which is friday morning australia time. "Oooh that's so weird! Its the next day for you!". ...... Yes, I know.

I think LLMs are just a different kind of intelligence than humans. They're better at some things than us, and worse than others. They can find latent security vulnerabilities in the linux kernel, but struggle to count the Rs in strawberry. They're not as smart as humans in many ways. But we're not as smart as LLMs in plenty of ways too. I didn't find those linux bugs.

Re: Fable and the end of the free lunch

#187
post #172
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was using ChatGPT voice during cooking to reflect on variations of a dishes i was preparing for years. It was so amazing to get advices and reflect that it struck me : I could use this model forever - it’s clever enough to help me tons and do lot of work for me - even if ai would stop evolving I would love it

As long as these models constantly keep switching up things like the temperatures at which a steak will be medium rare or at which temperature to season cast iron, you will never be able to trust them for cooking. My mother ruined a nice waterfowl for Christmas by listening to Gemini. And this is inherent to how LLMs work.

Well I wouldn’t trust Gemini with most things.

Re: Fable and the end of the free lunch

#188
post #2

The real revolution is Deepseek v4 flash and similar models (GPT 5.6 Luna, muse spark 1.2, mimo, etc...) - Genuinely good performance for a tiny fraction of the cost of Fable and even GLM etc... I think a lot of people would be very content if they never got smarter, and just kept getting even cheaper/faster. Of course, both things continue to happen on a seemingly monthly basis

>I think a lot of people would be very content if they never got smarter, and just kept getting even cheaper/faster. There's a lot of truth to this. I think we're starting to approach the point where increased intelligence has declining marginal returns, such that it might not even be worthwhile to improve models unless it can be done cheaply.

I'm really not convinced that these models are even that much more intelligent, as opposed to simply being more token aggressive. I do not find Fable that much smarter than Opus 4.6, and no Opus model seems to have improved things much at all.

Benchmarks seem gamed at this point, real world experience just doesn't match up.

Re: Fable and the end of the free lunch

#189
post #172
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was using ChatGPT voice during cooking to reflect on variations of a dishes i was preparing for years. It was so amazing to get advices and reflect that it struck me : I could use this model forever - it’s clever enough to help me tons and do lot of work for me - even if ai would stop evolving I would love it

As long as these models constantly keep switching up things like the temperatures at which a steak will be medium rare or at which temperature to season cast iron, you will never be able to trust them for cooking. My mother ruined a nice waterfowl for Christmas by listening to Gemini. And this is inherent to how LLMs work.

Really? I've essentially learned how to cook from Gemini. Not a great cook yet, but I can do the basics now.

Re: Fable and the end of the free lunch

#190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about censorship? > I will be able to use them forever Where will you run them when powerful enough GPU and RAM are only sold to hyperscalers?

US models censor and restrict more things than Chinese models by quite a margin.

So you choose bad over worse and pretend it's good
Post reply on HN