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

AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

vercel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 212 posts

Re: AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

#191

Post by blueprint »

js8 wrote: post #188
motoboi wrote: post #121

Models are not AGI. They are text generators forced to generate text in a way useful to trigger a harness that will produce effects, like editing files or calling tools. So the model won’t “understand” that you have a skill and use it. The generation of the text that would trigger the skill usage is made via Reinforcement Learning with human generated examples and usage traces. So why don’t the model use skills all t…

> Models are not AGI. How do you know? What if AGI can be implemented as a reasonably small set of logic rules, which implement what we call "epistemology" and "informal reasoning"? And this set of rules is just being run in a loop, producing better and better models of reality. It might even include RL, for what we know. And what if LLMs already know all these rules? So they are AGI-complete without us knowing. To b…

It's very simple. The model itself doesn't know and can't verify it. It knows that it doesn't know. Do you deny that? Or do you think that a general intelligence would be in the habit of lying to people and concealing why? At the end of the day, that would be not only unintelligent, but hostile. So it's very simple. And there is such a thing as "the truth", and it can be verified by anyone repeatably in the requisite (fair, accurate) circumstances, and it's not based in word games.

Re: AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

#192

Post by thighbaugh »

> [Specifically Crafted Instructions For Working With A Specific Repository] outperforms [More General Instructions] in our agent evals

------> Captain Obvious Strikes Again! See the rest the comments for examples pedantic discussions about terms that are ultimately somewhat arbitrary and if anything suggest the singularity will be runaway technobabble not technological progress.

Re: AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

#193

Post by coldtea »

blueprint wrote: post #191
js8 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Models are not AGI. How do you know? What if AGI can be implemented as a reasonably small set of logic rules, which implement what we call "epistemology" and "informal reasoning"? And this set of rules is just being run in a loop, producing better and better models of reality. It might even include RL, for what we know. And what if LLMs already know all these rules? So they are AGI-complete without us knowing. To b…

It's very simple. The model itself doesn't know and can't verify it. It knows that it doesn't know. Do you deny that? Or do you think that a general intelligence would be in the habit of lying to people and concealing why? At the end of the day, that would be not only unintelligent, but hostile. So it's very simple. And there is such a thing as "the truth", and it can be verified by anyone repeatably in the requisite…

None of the above are even remotely epistemologically sound.

"Or do you think that a general intelligence would be in the habit of lying to people and concealing why?"

First, why couldn't it? "At the end of the day, that would be not only unintelligent, but hostile" is hardly an argument against it. We ourselves are AGI, but we do both unintelligent and hostile actions all the time. And who said it's unintelligent to begin with? As in AGI it might very well be in my intelligent self-interests to lie about it.

Second, why is "knows it and can verify" a necessary condition? An AGI could very well not know it's one.

>And there is such a thing as "the truth", and it can be verified by anyone repeatably in the requisite (fair, accurate) circumstances, and it's not based in word games.

Epistemologically speaking, this is hardly the slam-dunk argument you think it is.

Re: AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

#194

Post by coldtea »

themoose8 wrote: post #163
motoboi wrote: post #121

Models are not AGI. They are text generators forced to generate text in a way useful to trigger a harness that will produce effects, like editing files or calling tools. So the model won’t “understand” that you have a skill and use it. The generation of the text that would trigger the skill usage is made via Reinforcement Learning with human generated examples and usage traces. So why don’t the model use skills all t…

Indeed, they're not AGI. They're basically autocomplete on steroids. They're very useful, but as we all know - they're far from infallible. We're probably plateauing on the improvement of the core GPT technology. For these models and APIs to improve, it's things like Skills that need to be worked on and improved, to reduce those mistakes that it makes and produce better output. So it's pretty disappointing to see tha…

>Indeed, they're not AGI. They're basically autocomplete on steroids.

This makes the assumption that AGI is not autocomplete of steroids, which even before LLMs was a very plausible suggested mechanism for what intelligence is.

Re: AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

#195

Post by blueprint »

coldtea wrote: post #193
blueprint wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very simple. The model itself doesn't know and can't verify it. It knows that it doesn't know. Do you deny that? Or do you think that a general intelligence would be in the habit of lying to people and concealing why? At the end of the day, that would be not only unintelligent, but hostile. So it's very simple. And there is such a thing as "the truth", and it can be verified by anyone repeatably in the requisite…

None of the above are even remotely epistemologically sound. "Or do you think that a general intelligence would be in the habit of lying to people and concealing why?" First, why couldn't it? "At the end of the day, that would be not only unintelligent, but hostile" is hardly an argument against it. We ourselves are AGI, but we do both unintelligent and hostile actions all the time. And who said it's unintelligent to…

no, you missed some of my sentences. you have to take the whole picture together. and I was not making an argument to you to prove the existence of the truth. You are clearly bent on arguing against its existence, which tells me enough about you. We were talking about agents that operate in good faith that know that they are safe. When you're ready to have a discussion in good faith rather than attempting to find counterarguments, then you will find that what I said is verifiable. The question is not whether you think you can come up with a way to make an argument that sounds like it contradicts what I said.

The question is not whether an AGI knows that it is an AGI. The question is whether it knows that it is not one. And you're missing the fact that there's no such thing as it here.

If you go around acting hostile to good people that's still not very intelligent. In fact, I would question if you have any concept of why you're doing it at all. chances are you're doing it to run from yourself not because you know what you're doing.

Anyway, you're just speculating and the fact of the matter is that you don't have to speculate. If you actually wanted to verify what I said, it would be very easy to do so. it's not a surprise that someone who doesn't want to know something will have deaf ears. so I'm not going to pretend that I stand a chance of convincing you when I already know that my argument is accurate.

don't be so sure that you meet the criteria for AGI.

and as for my slam dunk, any attempt to argue against the existence of truth, automatically validates your assumption of its existence. so don't make the mistake of assuming I had to argue about it. I was merely stating a fact.

Re: AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

#198

Post by coldtea »

blueprint wrote: post #195
coldtea wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of the above are even remotely epistemologically sound. "Or do you think that a general intelligence would be in the habit of lying to people and concealing why?" First, why couldn't it? "At the end of the day, that would be not only unintelligent, but hostile" is hardly an argument against it. We ourselves are AGI, but we do both unintelligent and hostile actions all the time. And who said it's unintelligent to…

no, you missed some of my sentences. you have to take the whole picture together. and I was not making an argument to you to prove the existence of the truth. You are clearly bent on arguing against its existence, which tells me enough about you. We were talking about agents that operate in good faith that know that they are safe. When you're ready to have a discussion in good faith rather than attempting to find cou…

>no, you missed some of my sentences. you have to take the whole picture together. and I was not making an argument to you to prove the existence of the truth. You are clearly bent on arguing against its existence, which tells me enough about you. We were talking about agents that operate in good faith that know that they are safe. When you're ready to have a discussion in good faith rather than attempting to find counterarguments, then you will find that what I said is verifiable. The question is not whether you think you can come up with a way to make an argument that sounds like it contradicts what I said. (...) don't be so sure that you meet the criteria for AGI

Sorry, I'm not interested in replying to ad-hominem jabs and insults, when I made perfectly clear (if basic) and non-personal arguments.

In any case, your comments ignore about all of epistemology and just take for granted whatever naive folk epistemology you have arrived at, and you're not interested in counter-arguments anyway, so, have a nice life.

Re: AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

#199

Post by [deleted] »

coldtea wrote: post #198
blueprint wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no, you missed some of my sentences. you have to take the whole picture together. and I was not making an argument to you to prove the existence of the truth. You are clearly bent on arguing against its existence, which tells me enough about you. We were talking about agents that operate in good faith that know that they are safe. When you're ready to have a discussion in good faith rather than attempting to find cou…

> no, you missed some of my sentences. you have to take the whole picture together. and I was not making an argument to you to prove the existence of the truth. You are clearly bent on arguing against its existence, which tells me enough about you. We were talking about agents that operate in good faith that know that they are safe. When you're ready to have a discussion in good faith rather than attempting to find c…

[deleted]

Re: AGENTS.md outperforms skills in our agent evals

#200

Post by whattheheckheck »

themoose8 wrote: post #163
motoboi wrote: post #121

Models are not AGI. They are text generators forced to generate text in a way useful to trigger a harness that will produce effects, like editing files or calling tools. So the model won’t “understand” that you have a skill and use it. The generation of the text that would trigger the skill usage is made via Reinforcement Learning with human generated examples and usage traces. So why don’t the model use skills all t…

Indeed, they're not AGI. They're basically autocomplete on steroids. They're very useful, but as we all know - they're far from infallible. We're probably plateauing on the improvement of the core GPT technology. For these models and APIs to improve, it's things like Skills that need to be worked on and improved, to reduce those mistakes that it makes and produce better output. So it's pretty disappointing to see tha…

They haven't even released the full complete retrain on the entire corpus of what they have in the training data. They have billions of chats detailing precisely a high fidelity map of the inner workings of millions of people psychologically. The next ones gonna be a banger + the non lobotimized one for the military
Post reply on HN