News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Claude Opus 4.8 by manmal on Thursday May 28, 2026 @03:17PM (#48314035)
But how? The training data is the unadulterated content those models are based on? I genuinely don’t understand, no snark.
Re:Claude Opus 4.8 by wtallis on Thursday May 28, 2026 @07:11PM (#48316830)
Raw training data is raw. A really big model trained on it has already done a first-pass of finding patterns and squeezing out redundancy. Re-ingesting the full training set to train a smaller model is probably more expensive, for marginal quality improvement over distilling from the large model.
Re:Claude Opus 4.8 by adgjlsfhk1 on Thursday May 28, 2026 @08:41PM (#48317502)
Distilling from a larger model is not only probably cheaper than from data, it's also likely higher quality. There's pretty strong support for the proposition that NNs learn a smoothed and regularized version of the data. The NNs are likely higher quality than most of the data they are training from.
Re:Claude Opus 4.8 by semiquaver on Saturday June 06, 2026 @12:28AM (#48421390)
This guy or gal or person gets it.