News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:We fine-tuned Llama and got 4.2x Sonnet 3.5 accuracy for ... by tucnak on Thursday January 02, 2025 @09:09AM (#42574533)
No it's not! These are probably imposters anyway. Apparently, you can buy HN upvotes... I find it hard to believe that honest researchers from frontier labs would behave like crypto scammers.
Re:We fine-tuned Llama and got 4.2x Sonnet 3.5 accuracy for ... by uxhacker on Thursday January 02, 2025 @09:28AM (#42574686)
It’s also weird that there is no about page naming the founders.
Re:We fine-tuned Llama and got 4.2x Sonnet 3.5 accuracy for ... by Lerc on Thursday January 02, 2025 @10:19AM (#42575160)
Re:We fine-tuned Llama and got 4.2x Sonnet 3.5 accuracy for ... by zwaps on Thursday January 02, 2025 @11:01AM (#42575558)
It says they WILL fine tune a model.

Sounds fishy

Re:We fine-tuned Llama and got 4.2x Sonnet 3.5 accuracy for ... by samatdav on Thursday January 02, 2025 @11:25PM (#42582417)
At Asana we did not do any fine-tuning because it was too complicated even for our AI org of 40 engineers. We believe we can do it by setting up and cleaning data correctly.
Re:We fine-tuned Llama and got 4.2x Sonnet 3.5 accuracy for ... by tucnak on Thursday January 02, 2025 @01:54PM (#42577459)
There's a reason why you don't see frontier-grade AI researchers throwing around meaningless numbers to go with the most layman idea of a product in the field imaginable. The whole thing stinks. I reckon this is some kind of extortion scam intended to trick people into compromising IP.
Re:We fine-tuned Llama and got 4.2x Sonnet 3.5 accuracy for ... by samatdav on Thursday January 02, 2025 @11:28PM (#42582431)
I understand the concern but we don't need anyone's IP. Unfortunately, it is hard to provide fine-tuning solution without access to the codebase. We just think that using a large general-purpose model for a highly specific codebase with a lot of internal frameworks is not the best solution and want to try to improve it.