Live data from Hacker News

Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

simonwillison.net

81–90 of 659 posts

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#81
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No she can't, comments likes yours are just made up nonsense that AI hype-mans and investors somehow convinced us are a fair opinions to have.

While AI is overhyped by some people, the parent's statement is not only true but was true long before o1 was released.

Do you know of an example game by someone with no coding experience using an LLM?

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#82
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * To convert Linux kernel subsystems into Python so I can quickly understand them (I'm a C programmer but everyone reads Python faster). Do you have an example chat of this output? Sounds interesting. Do you just dump the C source code into the prompt and ask it to convert to Python?

No, ChatGPT is way cooler than that. It's already read every line of kernel code ever written. I start with a subsystem: the device mapper is a good recent example. I ask things like "explain the linux device mapper. if it was a class in an object-oriented language, what would its interface look like?" and "give me dm_target as a python class". I get stuff like: def linear_ctr(target, argc, argv): print("Constructor…

it's all placeholders - that's my experience with gpt trying to write slop code

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#83
post #44

It kind of seems like they just wrote a generalized DSPy program. Can anyone confirm? This has been a very incremental year for OpenAI. If this is what it seems like, then I’ve got to believe they’re stalling for time.

DSPy?

https://github.com/stanfordnlp/dspy

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#84
post #43

It's interesting to note that there's really two things going on here: 1. A LLM (probably a finetuned GPT-4o) trained specifically to read and emit good chain-of-thought prompts. 2. Runtime code that iteratively re-prompts the model with the chain of thought so far. This sounds like it includes loops, branches and backtracking. This is not "the model", it's regular code invoking the model. Interesting that OpenAI is…

The innovation lies in using RL to achieve 1.) and provide a simple interface to 2.)

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#85
post #43

It's interesting to note that there's really two things going on here: 1. A LLM (probably a finetuned GPT-4o) trained specifically to read and emit good chain-of-thought prompts. 2. Runtime code that iteratively re-prompts the model with the chain of thought so far. This sounds like it includes loops, branches and backtracking. This is not "the model", it's regular code invoking the model. Interesting that OpenAI is…

One aspect that’s not achievable is they discuss hiding the chain of thought in its raw form because the chains are allowed to be unaligned. This allows the model to operate without any artifacts from alignment and apply them in the post processing, more or less. This requires effectively root and you would need the unaligned weights.

Ok but this presses on a latent question: what do we mean by alignment?

Practically it's come to mean just sanitization... "don't say something nasty or embarrassing to users." But that doesn't apply here, the reasoning tokens are effectively just a debug log.

If alignment means "conducting reasoning in alignment with human values", then misalignment in the reasoning phase could potentially be obfuscated and sanitized, participating in the conclusion but hidden. Having an "unaligned" model conduct the reasoning steps is potentially dangerous, if you believe that AI alignment can give rise to danger at all.

Personally I think that in practice alignment has come to mean just sanitization and it's a fig leaf of an excuse for the real reason they are hiding the reasoning tokens: competitive advantage.

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#86
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No she can't, comments likes yours are just made up nonsense that AI hype-mans and investors somehow convinced us are a fair opinions to have.

While AI is overhyped by some people, the parent's statement is not only true but was true long before o1 was released.

[flagged]

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A properly written requirements spec, and an engineer, can do the work of 5. I do not think this will scale. GPT o1 is presumably good for bootstrapping a project using tools that the engineer is not familiar with. The model will struggle to update a sizable codebase, however, with dependencies between the files. Secondly, no matter the size of the codebase and no matter the model used, the engineer still has to re…

I respectfully, but completely disagree. Right now with sonnet 3.5 + cursor ide, I'm not writing that much of my own code at my FAANG job. I am generating a ton, passing in documentation from internal libraries, iterating on the result. Most of the time, I just accept its changes. This is going to rapidly happen. All we need are a few more model releases, not even a step function improvement

> I'm not writing that much of my own code at my FAANG job.

> Most of the time, I just accept its changes.

This speaks more about the problems at FAANG, other companies, etc than AI vs a human developer. And AI isn't the real fix.

Are we just repeating things 100x a day or is it still so chaotic and immature? Or are we implying that AI is at a point where it's writing Google Spanner from scratch and you're able to review and confirm it passes transactional tests?

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#88
post #43

It's interesting to note that there's really two things going on here: 1. A LLM (probably a finetuned GPT-4o) trained specifically to read and emit good chain-of-thought prompts. 2. Runtime code that iteratively re-prompts the model with the chain of thought so far. This sounds like it includes loops, branches and backtracking. This is not "the model", it's regular code invoking the model. Interesting that OpenAI is…

Well, if LLMs are system 1, this difference would be building towards system 2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#89
post #43

It's interesting to note that there's really two things going on here: 1. A LLM (probably a finetuned GPT-4o) trained specifically to read and emit good chain-of-thought prompts. 2. Runtime code that iteratively re-prompts the model with the chain of thought so far. This sounds like it includes loops, branches and backtracking. This is not "the model", it's regular code invoking the model. Interesting that OpenAI is…

I have also spent some time on 2) and implemented several approaches in this open source optimising llm proxy - https://github.com/codelion/optillm

In my experience it does work quite well, but we probably need different techniques for different tasks.

Re: Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

#90
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, ChatGPT is way cooler than that. It's already read every line of kernel code ever written. I start with a subsystem: the device mapper is a good recent example. I ask things like "explain the linux device mapper. if it was a class in an object-oriented language, what would its interface look like?" and "give me dm_target as a python class". I get stuff like: def linear_ctr(target, argc, argv): print("Constructor…

it's all placeholders - that's my experience with gpt trying to write slop code

Those are placeholders for user callbacks passed to the device mapper subsystem. It’s a usage example not implementation code.
Post reply on HN