upvote
Would be cool if there was a benchmark to evaluate the “tool-like” quality of a model - its capability to quickly, cheaply, accurately, do exactly as it is asked.
reply
This is interesting because I have transitioned to where I use SOT models.. but I kind of use them like employees that I can delegate to. I still review code.

However, I now literally say.. "Here is my objective and here is a starting point for documentation. Research this and build up a plan."

This can be very company specific, like migration from one framework to another in house infrastructure framework. I'm spending my time figuring out how the plan should be chopped so I can have confidence in the parts and not overwhelmed. I don't want a tool, I want a model that can stitch resources together into a plan. That type of model is in a whole other ballpark.

reply
>I started using Spark 1.2 for development because if you're willing to let Meta train on your data it was dirt cheap

its free on opencode and i use it for personal projects. most of my personal projects are AI generated since its personal projects. nothing important are on them. it is hilarious if Meta is training their AI model with AI generated code.

reply
The useful training data is when you clarify your intent, when you tell the model a different approach would be better, when you consistently refactor towards Y and away from X, and so on. The training data isn’t the code, it’s the session transcript. (Anthropic would call this a “distillation attack” against their model, but in this case the model is you!)
reply
I would imagine your interactions with it are more important than the output.
reply
Funny. I use it through Opencode Go which gives more use than I can use, but didn't realize it was actually free on Zen. Will switch to that I guess
reply
Every lab trains their models with AI generated code at this point.
reply
Hopefully, 'validated' AI code
reply
What do you think you're doing when you accept an edit, press thumbs up, or don't ask for modifications after an edit.
reply
Thats not exactly 'validated'. Feels very noisy, it is not a good bar for either - does this code do what the user actually asked - is this code actually 'good'

There would be so many examples of coding projects that these models began or attempted to work in, that were abandoned because the models were floundering.

I would imagine the labs have some decent ways to produce novel requirements and then actually validate they are met, without the noisiness of implicit human feedback.

That said, the more I think about it, you are right, there's probably also very good ways to extract signal for all these sessions.

reply
This is exactly what RLVR is, and the reason that models have improved so much at verifiable domains like coding and math while not so much on unverifiable ones like writing and UI design.
reply
Training on ai generated content is how the models got a big jump in capability
reply
If it's a mistake, it should course-correct.

I agree that some of the smarter models are actually worse. I hope they take a model that's good enough--there are many--and just try to get it chatjimmy.ai speed.

I have to think that's the future, somehow, and I'm really excited about it.

reply
[dead]
reply