logoalt Hacker News

kenjackson • today at 1:28 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

I just reread both and neither seem misleading to me. If anything the title is underwhelming.


Replies

stymaar • today at 6:23 PM

> These results show sparks of Weight-Space Programming, which may extend beyond what we’d expect from humans or conventional algorithms. This might be a big deal for both optimization and interpretability. […]

> Likewise, asked to make Qwen3.5-0.8B better at math without gradients, Astra identifies an issue in its weights causing reasoning loops that Qwen’s own model card warns about, and fixes this by natively editing 0.016% of the weights.

How is that not misleading when the in the Qwen case “natively editing” refers to a mere directional ablation, a well-known technique that has been used a ton by both academics and hobbyists over the past few years?