openmic.social is an uncensored community. You may encounter strong language, controversial opinions, and mature or NSFW material. You must be 18+ to browse. Illegal content is prohibited and removed on sight — please report it. By continuing, you accept that you may see content you personally disagree with.
While superficially correct, your description of agentic work overemphasises the error bit of the trial and error. The newest models have been trained on this loop and the tool use involved, the failure rate of tool calls in a given run is low, and the corrections precise. The final outcome is valid and useful in the vast majority of cases.
This article outlines the co-development of harnesses and models, if you’re at all interested: https://www.latent.space/p/attention-interface
I should clarify - I do think there are use cases for smaller local models performing very specific tasks - the technology I am specifically referring to as “useless” are the massive data center LLMs.
AI is such a blanket term (intentionally conflated with useful technology by the people poised to profit from said LLMs) that it’s a bit difficult to discuss it as a singular technology. I have no problem with machine learning, or with neural networks in general.
I am, however, having difficulty reading this as a good-faith article
“Lukasz Kaiser, one of the people who invented the Transformer, said on “Unsupervised Learning” in June:”
That man (Lukasz Kaiser) is an employee of OpenAI, which is a massive conflict of interest imo, and disqualifies him from making impartial claims about the technology.
What I find particularly sketchy is the vague use of the word transformer in this context. The transformer was invented in 1886, there are no living persons who helped to invent it. To present this man as the inventor of “the transformer” without clarification/disambiguation is disingenuous. It smells fishy to me.
Kaiser is one of the coauthors of Attention is all you need, the paper that introduced the Transformer architecture, the basis for all major LLMs.
3b1b has a writeup: https://www.3blue1brown.com/lessons/attention/
Attention is the mechanism that lets an LLM use the (correct parts of the) entire context to predict the next word.
Oh yeah, I was able to figure out why the article said that with a couple search queries, but I still think that the phrasing in the article is misleading (and likely intentionally so).
Edit: Also, I think part of what’s confusing people is that they keep using terms like “attention” and “inference” to describe computer processes that may or may not have some kind of underlying similarity to the corresponding human capabilities. I also believe this to be deliberate obfuscation.