blah2244
The Software Engineer Spectrum: Speed vs. Accuracy
Ugly Code and Dumb Things
Each token the model outputs requires it to evaluate all of the context it already has (query + existing output). By allowing it more tokens to "reason", you're allowing it to evaluate the context many times over, similar to how a person might turn a problem over in their heads before coming up with an answer. Given the performance of reasoning models on complex tasks, I'm of the opinion that the "more tokens with reasoning prompting" approach is at least a decent model of the process that humans would go through to "reason".
Judge Your Coworkers
As for training, that's a pretty contentious topic in the running community right now -- some recent research concluded that training in supershoes might actually impair race performance: https://www.outsideonline.com/health/training-performance/su...
The Economics of Being a Founding Engineer
URL-addressable Pyodide Python environments
Legal AI Startup Harvey Raises $300M Series D
How I learned to code with my voice
Nontraditional Red Teams
How I give the right amount of context (in any situation)
He's a good writer, but his content is written through an extreme anti-AI lens, so take it with a pretty big grain of salt.
Is it just me, or is that an incredibly weak/vague definition for AGI? Feels like you could make the claim that AI is at this level already if you stretch the terms he used enough.
Similar significant results for symptoms of cystic fibrosis: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32275788/
They appear to basically RLHF a model on a bunch of examples of human/AI output on the same prompt. Not sure how well it works, but I'm guessing Mozilla is doing something similar here.
I still enjoy articles like these, though -- think the author did a good job of describing the hats as "modes of working that you switch between" instead of "all-encompassing static personality traits that put you in a box".