4 ms·
I’m pleased for you. In my experience the use of agents and harnesses and other scaffolding around them doesn’t improve the performance of LLMs much, which is
by grey-area 2mo ago
I’m pleased for you.
In my experience the use of agents and harnesses and other scaffolding around them doesn’t improve the performance of LLMs much, which is adequate for some tasks under supervision but nothing like general intelligence (or electricity for that matter). But good that it works for you.
- qarl2 2mo ago> In my experience the use of agents and harnesses and other scaffolding around them doesn’t improve the performance of LLMs much I have to say - that seems straight-up crazy to me. Would you mind digging into that discussion? As just one example - in a harness I can ask an agent to confirm everything it says via a second sub agent - which dramatically improves the output. It almost entirely solves the problem of hallucinations. You don't see that as an improvement?
- qarl2 2mo agoOH - I think I understand now. You're like LeCun - dismissive of LLMs in all their forms. So of course agents can't lead to AGI, because LLMs just can't. Which I've always found so strange. Language was always considered the pinnacle of the human mind - right up until we created LLMs. Now it's the world model - the things that animals always had and the thing we used to look down on. From my perspective, language is still at the top. I'm not a fickle lover of the gaps.