upvote
> but way, way better at creative writing than Qwen and even better than Gemma 4 26 and 31b.

I suspect this is the only use-case I would consider...and I don't really have a use-case for "creative writing" that I would delegate to an LLM. I suppose for dialogue generation in games?

But yes, hard agree. Why on Earth would you ever want to write code with a model that is supposedly "jailbroken"? So it can put great backdoors into everything it touches? Pass.

reply
I've noticed most fine-tunes, whether "heretic" models or something else, tend to be over-fitting, or something, at least some of the time, and get kind of chaotic. I want to believe normal folks with normal resources can be involved in this stuff, as I'm working on fine-tuned specialist models as we speak, but it seems like it takes notable investment and time. My first experiment was teaching a little Gemma 4 more to write more like me with a LoRA (like you, I don't want to use a model to write for me, but I did want training data that I could ethically use, and I've written several million words on the internet over the years), and it wasn't what I would call a success. It either wrote like an asshole (which I only do, like, 15% of the time) or it just borrowed a few of my quirks, like too many ellipses, if I applied it less heavily.
reply
> I suppose for dialogue generation in games?

I use it to write short sci-fi stories. Life is not only about being an SDE.

> Why on Earth would you ever want to write code with a model that is supposedly "jailbroken"?

I need a model which decent enough at coding to write boilerplate for me, yet I do not need to unload in case I want to write an article or enguage in my writing hobby.Exactly why Gemma 4 are so popular.

> So it can put great backdoors into everything it touches?

What a strange take...

reply