top 83 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 148 points 3 months ago (19 children)

But it’s so good at programming if you already know how to program! Surely that’s worth burning the planet and crashing the world economy??

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 3 months ago (16 children)

    Actually still no

    https://github.com/JustVugg/colibri

    Everyone was desperate to be first because capitalism. But we are getting good models without the insane build out requirement. Which will be hilarious to leave the cunts holding the bag. Not that the planet is better for it in the end.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    ~1 token per second (storage bound gen4 nvme)... Some of us have places to be.

    Don't get me wrong. Its impressive that it can run at all, but honestly the usecase is exceedingly narrow. You'd have better results with a structured quantized gpu-only gemma or qwen workflow. Quality over quantity, rely on validation and a structured process: lots of cross-model review and iteration loops with spec and test driven dev. You could probably get a working alpha by the time colibri set up the environment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago* (10 children)

    Yeah I'm just beginning my local AI journey on a 5080, tried Qwen3.6 27b Q4 and was getting like 1tps because of the vram overflow. Ran it over night at it was still chewing on generating a prompt for a sub agent when I got up in the middle of the night until it simply ended in some kind of "fetch failure" lol. I think I gave it something too large to tackle, but either way 1tps is kinda garbage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    You could use the 35B MoE model, tune it a little bit and get much better results. I have a 5060 ti and 70-80 tok/s are the norm

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    That's what I generally use. I wanted to see if I could use the 27b to "review" what the 35b put out. The 35b has been working pretty well, but it's not very thorough. I asked it to make a program and then 27b was like "this is a skeleton, there are folders but no contents." Lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    These models generally are not capable enough to do one-shot vibe coding. They are pretty good as coding assistants if you tell them exactly what you want and let them focus on a specific aspect/part of code, not the whole thing at once.

    Using an agent framework (I like Kilo on VSCode but there are many others) you can start with a planning session to let the model find out what you want to build. Then you let it write that gist into AGENTS.md and double check if that is what you want. AGENTS.md will be loaded into the context automatically so the model has a solid base of understanding for everything you do afterwards. Once you have that, building in vertical slices on top of that skeleton is much easier. Another neat trick is to ask the model a few questions about the current code base (if there is any...) at the beginning of a session, e.g. "How does feature x work in the current code? ". This primes the model for what you are about to do. All this is obviously a bit more work than just vibe coding away, but it lets you keep in control of the code and helps in being alert for errors these models (and all LLMs in general) will inevitably produce.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    Thanks for the tips! What I had started doing the other day was having one session where it reviewed the code and created a document explaining what the program did in technical detail and then in another session I asked it to review that document before attempting anything with the program. Agent programs and harnesses are the next thing I need to start learning for sure.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Is that quantized? 4 bit Qwen 3.6 can get 22tps on a 1060.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    It's the q4 quantization, but it requires 20+GB vram and my 5080 only has 16

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    What are you using to run the model? Llama.cpp will automatically split the model between your system ram and graphics card's vram.

    Qwen 3.6 is a mixture of experts model with only 3B parameters active at a time. Even without quantization your card could easily run that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    It has been some time since my initial comment so at the time I was mainly using LM studio. Qwen 3.6 a3b is the MOE and it does work well on my card, but the dense model that is more intelligent/capable is the Qwen 3.6 27b which doesn't fit on the card and does get offloaded, but offloading cuts the speed down to like 1/tps.

    I have since found a version of the 27b model that is "quantized," for lack of a better term, differently and has to be run through TabbyAPI which gets back to 30ish tps. It can't offload so it must fit fully on the card which keeps the speed high. Might be worth a look if you're interested, the only downside is that with my 16gb card the context limit has to be kept pretty low ~40k if I remember correctly

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    The engine is a single C file (c/glm.c, ~2,400 lines)

    That file is almost 6k lines. The style also makes my eyes bleed. Why do people pretend stuffing 6k lines of code with almost no whitespace and meaningless variable names into a single file is a good thing? I've seen this a lot recently

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Assuming the vars are all really short, it sounds like the same idea behind Webpack's (et al) minification & mangling to achieve tiny performance gains everywhere it can. Which might mean there's a dev version that isn't squashed and ugly, but doesn't make it to us..?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    Actually, it's better at programming if you don't know how to program.

    For example, someone who didn't know how to program sent me a patch to my code to 'fix' a problem they encountered. It was changed to silently swallow the error that really really would have needed to be fixed, but they were so enthusiastic that the problem looked to go away that they wouldn't let me know actually actionable debug information and just whined that I wouldn't take Claude's perfectly good fix for it. It is much better at satisfying folks that don't know how to look for better.

    To satisfy my standards, I would have had to extract more debugging info, probably construct a test case tickling that exact situation making an expected error to ensure it won't just throw it away, and add it to the suite and then ask it to spin until the test case passed.

    But alas, I'm neck deep in merge requests from folks that were formerly intimidated by coding and are now complaining that I'm not accepting more of their changes and more quickly because "all" I have to do is review the code which is obviously so much easier than writing it... It's like the "I have an app idea, all I need is for you to do it", but on steriods....

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 50 points 3 months ago (18 children)

    Whoever thought that this machine that can predict next word in a sentence, next sentence in a conversation etc. should be used in place of all human intellectual work... should have his elderly care taken over by LLM.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    That's what is wild about it. At any given point in time, the model is wholly consumed only with the very next token. Maybe that token is a running narrative of 'reasoning' or directly in the output, either way, the AI does not have anything to model anything beyond the very next token. It doesn't have a destination in mind and is just finding the words to get there, it's building it up word by word. The overall 'meaning' is an emergent property of just picking the very next token and seeing what happens.

    Honestly, it's shocking it works as well as it does. More shockingly, there are AI enthusiasts that argue that's how the human brain works, which I can't imagine someone going through life with every thought rooted in building it up word by word.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Well yes and no. it is steered by a buffer of context as well that sorts/ranks/informs what the next word should be. That context differentiates if you are talking about apple the fruit or apple the company or apple the device. Heres a great overview if anyone is interested. And no, its not my video. Its a youtube intro to how AI works. Best watched with duckduckgo browser which trims out youtubes overly frequent ad interruptions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYvlznJ4IZQ

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    But that context is a mix of model output and other sources. The model output portion was generated token by token, and is combined in interesting ways with things like human response, search results, software output. It's still a backward looking mechanism, rather than having established a concept as a goal and then trying to build the words to reach that concept like we do.

    Size and strategy for managing the context has been critical for improved subjective results, but it still doesn't exhibit the behavior of the words as a tool to address some concept, everything about the model is about the words themselves. So we end up with something very good at generating what seems right and there's a super high chance of what seems to be right actually being right. Especially when the software can automatically execute commands and the good or bad results reach into the context window, enabling it to effectively get automatically second guessed. The potential for automatic verification in some scenarios automatically feeding the context window is what makes it particularly appealing for software folks, though not universal.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    My masters degree in intelligent systems wept in the corner after seeing your explanation.

    But I guess cars are just four wheels and a fancy basket people sit in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Well that description of a car is actually fairly close to the fundamentals, add an engine or motor and a steering wheel, and you've got it. Yes, a lot of engineering goes into the best possible realization of those basics, efficiency, suspension, safety, maintenance, and just a ton of more stuff, and it is a very valued execution above and beyond what, say, the Model T delivered. Automotive engineers have done hard and valuable work and complicated work, but no one is surprised that Model T led to faster, more comfortable, safer, more convenient vehicles that move around. It is a bit more surprising that LLM architecture works as well as it does while always focusing on the next token without ability to go further, best case running through and messing up and regenerating until you have operator appropriate output.

    The 'seahorse emoji' was a pretty fun example of this at work, as it didn't have a seahorse emoji, but since it wasn't trying to generate the emoji, it started by building up the words to confirm and introduce the emoji since obviously there will be one, then putting up a wrong thing, then the words that would go after the wrong thing, but the weight still suggested there should be a correct answer and to start generating words for another try, and so on. "Reasoning" does the job of incurring this hit out of sight a lot of the time. Looking at the reasoning chains you'll see this behavior a fair amount, that the model suggests words that build toward an answer but fails on the key word and retries until something tests right or it models that it tried enough and it can't find the key word that would have been expected. It can of course digest it's own output and summarize the result without showing the operator spinning out, but it at all times is operating on the fundamental principle of model+very cleverly managed context influencing an answer one token at a time and ideally discarding the first run.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    its not that simple. whatever opinion you might on llms have you have to agree this is oversimplifying at best.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I assumed that but everything I have seen as I dug deeper has been that at some level that is what is happening. If it is 'reasoning', it's generating a 'reasoning chain' next token by next token and using that to influence the final output tokens. The reasoning chain is discarded and since the actual output is a continuation of the reasoning chain it may conceptually be described as allowing the model to 'rethink' things, but even as the generation of a 'reasoning chain' has results that more closely resemble reasoning, it is still a scenario where it's building it one token at a time and we get to see meaning as an emergent property, rather than trying to find words to build to a more abstract concept like humans do. It just gets to throw away the intermediate work and the extra tokens manage to improve the 'accuracy' of the preserved final output.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    The interesting bits are when it derives the likely hood of something being correct and does more passes, or splits the data apart in the first pass and opens up new context processes with specialized instructions to handle it. The code stuff goes full on ororborus on some models, writes out the code on one pass, checks for issues on another pass, runs the code looking for errors on a third pass and goes back to step 1 if it fails.

    They're getting a lot out of it for it primarily just being a weighted token generator wrapped in an orchestrator.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Particularly software development with very good and very quick tests allow rerolling and that is very appealing in those scenarios. Problems being that very good tests are rarer than people like to think and sometimes it just gets stuck in a loop. At work the other week someone set it at the task of fixing a bunch of build warnings that had accumulated over the years. It succeeded after burning through tokens to take 30 tries at it. It's solution after all that hard thinking? It put // @ts-nocheck at the top of every file and called it a day.

    But superficially, someone handed it a chore and didn't have to think about it, and if no one looked deeper, then it was able to get to the desired behavior simply by rerunning the given task over and over without human intervention until it worked. Which is also broadly relatable as there's a lot of humans in the industry acting broadly the same, but I've always been frustrated by those folks anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Wide scoping like that rarely ends well. Give it the list, tell it to spin a new agent for every single issue and operate on them separately. If any of those agents run out of context memory, it will just shit the bed. Clarify that you need the test to actually work and not be commented out, and that the tests themselves still need to be viable and indicate a healthy working app, not just report that it's healthy. Trying to get tests happy in AI is like making wishes on a monkey's paw. Then assign someone to look after it because that bastard will chew through 10's of thousands of dollars to fix a laundry list of tests, which in my dev experience will be all broken and ignored in 2-3 minor releases.

    You can generally get it to do things, even somewhat complicated things, but it's not easy, and the shit it gives you back while you're trying to convince it to do the job is the same stuff you'd fire an employee over.

    My favorite thing is to make it make ansible tools, They're easy to read, easy to lock down, keys and passwords go in a vault that it's forbidden to read. Then I have it write runbooks on how to operate the playbooks. I then make an index of runbooks, and ask it to do them. It's an ansible job, so I can read it easily and make sure it's not able to delete my drive or my production database.

    If I lose access to cheap tokens, everything I've making is still usable, and for now, I can spend my time working on stuff that's not simple enough that it can handle it well.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago*

    Its just a ball rolling down a hill trying to find the lowest point, but its like a super fancy ball with a ton of rules, and the hills are really detailed with like little walls and bridges and stuff.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    What you have to understand is that the CEOs and upper management of these companies genuinely believe that human intelligence is just a predictive model. They are so divorced from humanity, from actual people, that they only trust each other, and even then, barely. Some psychologist posited that consciousness is in part predictive, then Curtis Yarvin latched onto that half-baked headline and wrote on it, and then these sick fucks all had the same ideas: That they each are always the smartest man in the room, that their genuinely shallow creativity is deeper than anyone else's, and that if the next guy who they consider almost as smart as themselves says it's because humans are just complex llm's then it must be true; that if they are barely smarter than this shittu technology, then all of humanity must be at or below it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I think that if you think you are better than other people you are then obligated to provide care and support for those you view as lessers. Then the very greatest that a person could be, and achieve, would be to care for and nurture the most people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    I don't need to know any CEO to find a person who thinks they are smarter or better than everyone else. Why americans gave so much power to those idiots is beyond me though.

    Also - post title is disingenuous. Current wave of AI is an engineering marvel, marketed dishonestly and used haphazardly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 70 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    We are repeating an old pattern in computing: throw more hardware at the problem until efficiency becomes impossible to ignore. Bigger models have delivered remarkable gains, but they’re increasingly expensive. The next breakthroughs may come less from adding parameters and more from smarter architectures, better algorithms and more efficient inference.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    DeepSeek has really led the way here, especially as they are a bit more hardware constrained. Plus they openly publish their findings and release open source models, so high hopes there.

    It's probably China's play to pop the AI bubble, but I'm all for it (:

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    I wonder what all is in the deepseek code that is malicious. I'd like to try it but don't want a million Mb/s of tracker shit across my network and can't run it myself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    AFAIK, their open models are distributed as weights, not executables and are therefore not able to start network connections / run code. There is of course tool-calling functionality but that just works by having the model output a special pattern and having something external run predetermined commands based on that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    They are open source models, nothing malicious about them. I'd be much more careful about where you run your agents on. The wrong prompt can even make a non-malicious model misbehave.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    The beauty of it is that it doesn't need tracker shit. It works to destroy the US AI bubble even without anything malicious within.

    And considering how hard the US researchers have been trying to control the output of their general LLMs, with little success, why would the Chinese have found a way before everyone else even thinks it's possible?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago

    Except there likely won't be a lot of further breakthroughs if we burn down our planet faster than we already do.

    This is all an expenditure of vast amounts of energy for literally no gain for anybody except a handful of billionaires and their corporations.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago

    If only the mainstream media would have said this since 2023. We maybe even have dodged the bullet called the Trump second term, but now we're heading towards a global financial collapse.

  • source
  • [–] 106 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    Look, if you know a way to convert a PDF to text with less than 500GB of VRAM and 2000W of power used for twenty seconds, I'm all ears.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Runs on anything that runs Linux:

    NAME
           pdftotext - Portable Document Format (PDF) to text converter (version 3.03)
    
    SYNOPSIS
           pdftotext [options] PDF-file [text-file]
    
    DESCRIPTION
           Pdftotext converts Portable Document Format (PDF) files to plain text.
    
           Pdftotext reads the PDF file, PDF-file, and writes a text file, text-file.  If text-file is not speci‐
           fied,  pdftotext  converts file.pdf to file.txt.  If text-file is ´-', the text is sent to stdout.  If
           PDF-file is ´-', it reads the PDF file from stdin.
    
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Well if you have a better way to generate Jurassic Park "but everyone's fat" videos I'd love to hear it.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    AI is the idea of putting a million monkeys in a room with a typewriter and waiting for Shakespeare.

    The smart people already knew the monkeys would just starve to death. The business majors are just now figuring that out.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    The ten thousandth monkey typed out the word "the" , fund them everything they'll type out Shakespeare!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Dude, the math says it would be cheaper to fund research into necromancy to revive the actual Shakespeare than this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Now I can read the Atlantic for free while also DDOSing people. The future is now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    It is no more different with the gold rushes to California, Oregon, and Alaska, where the real winners are the merchants selling pickaxes and work overalls.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago

    Efficiency deserves more attention than hype.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    6 comments in c/usa@lemmy.ml view that post
    5 comments in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post