logoalt Hacker News

prometheus1992today at 3:10 PM8 repliesview on HN

I think the main gripe that people had with Jev and Typesafe was the language used when they launched. To me personally it seemed like a parody/con/shady at first.

"Breakthrough", "our research went in another direction" , "Two years in stealth", "System One thinking model", "Jev can't hallucinate", "RLCD","We are doing very cool stuff, but we will have to hire you to tell you", - these are some of the things that they said on their website on the launch blog.

I had used versions of bert to achieve the same functionality years ago. But to me it seems like they were able to trick the VCs with "can't hallucinate" etc.

To the above author, kudos for sharing your work and making it open. Something like this shouldn't be closed in the first place when it has been available for so many years


Replies

yojotoday at 6:34 PM

Is this equivalent though? The Laya article ends with “ Treat Laya as a fast foundation model to specialize, not as an omniscient zero-shot oracle.”

I have a dozen different things at work that are currently using LLMs as classifiers for different questions. I don’t have the time, data, or resources to fine tune a model for each of them.

I haven’t had a chance to plug in Jev yet (waiting on approvals), but if it has the general intelligence claimed in the press release, then Laya is in no way comparable for my use case, and whatever TypeSafe has done is a substantial innovation over the Laya paper.

show 2 replies
wild_eggtoday at 3:15 PM

Last time I did anything with a BERT, you had to train or fine-tune. Is that not still true?

For me the cool bit is that it's all in-context learning or whatever so you can use it in any domain with zero setup.

Maybe bert and co. could do all the same things before, but the way in which you use them is quite different and that helps a lot.

show 2 replies
avereveardtoday at 7:32 PM

btw that how mmlu score things to answer question instead of producing all the answer token they look at logprob of a b c d keys in 2020 making this technique old as dirt in nlp

show 1 reply
seizethecheesetoday at 4:49 PM

I was confused by the “can’t hallucinate” thing, because it sounded like BS but people were taking it seriously. I purposefully asked a stupid question sort of like “this can’t hallucinate because it only has one output and there’s a schema?”. Was disappointed to learn the answer was yes.

show 3 replies
dominotwtoday at 4:55 PM

you forgot the main one "from the guy who invented chatgpt"

show 1 reply
refulgentistoday at 6:20 PM

"But to me it seems like they were able to trick the VCs with "can't hallucinate" etc."

I don't understand why we lept to accusatory and personal, nor do I understand where this connects with the article, nor do I understand the assertions if I ignore either of those two things.

The article claims non-hallucination, it makes sense, then there's just someone sort of hand-waving at it's obviously false and people dumber than you were tricked. Not sure what trope to invoke here. Chesterton's fence?

yipinwongtoday at 3:45 PM

Baity claims worked didn't it for Jev? (most likely from AI forsure)

I might not have a good rep for Jev any more but at least I know what kind of model to use for decisions for graph engineering.

gong_hitstoday at 7:10 PM

[dead]