6 ms·
Charge on the input tokens, then you will naturally optimise for fewer output tokens. Theoretically. In reality, one sessions output tokens become the next se
by dijit 25d ago
Charge on the input tokens, then you will naturally optimise for fewer output tokens.
Theoretically.
In reality, one sessions output tokens become the next sessions input tokens (at least if you continue the topic) so, its not as aligned as all that.
But the parent is right, when incentives are not aligned, friction will happen. Its inevitable.
- cthaeh 25d ago[dead]
- demibabs 25d ago“Claude, spend the next 10 hours trying to solve the Reimann Hypothesis”. I agree that incentives are misaligned but there’s several competing model providers. If one gets funny with their costs people will jump ship, especially if the gap between the top 2 labs and everyone else keeps shrinking.
- dijit 25d ago“I can take current sources and tell you how solved this is, but I am not willing to work to a timeframe or to solve things that aren’t yet solved by mathematicians or science” These safeguards already exist when they get a whiff that you might be using Claude to fix security issues. Doesn’t seem farfetched given the incentives I outlined that they would apply to this kind of abuse. How loose those controls are becomes a market force.
- dullcrisp 25d agoPerfect, a coding agent that refuses to do things that haven’t already been done before.
- dijit 25d agoHahahaha, I think you’ve misunderstood what LLMs are.
- dullcrisp 25d agoHave you ever tried using one? Or just understanding them?
- dijit 25d agoYes. But just so we're both entirely clear on what an LLM is... it's a token prediction system. it genuinely can't do things except recall things that have already existed. People are having great success composing things together in new ways, but just like the english language has a finite number of sentences, and music has a finite number of chords: LLMs too are just combining things that have existed. I don't want to sound condescending, it is remarkable how useful this technology is, but please don't evangelise them on capabilities that they genuinely can never have. Laptop computers have incredible processing capabilities but nobody expects them to be able to walk your dog, no matter how useful they actually are at doing other things.
- dullcrisp 25d agoYes and you suggested Anthropic have their coding agent refuse to attempt to solve anything it can’t find a preexisting solution to in case it turns out to be hard, if I understand you correctly. Knowing how hard something will be to do before attempting it is precisely the sort of impossible thing that it couldn’t do.
- deleted 25d ago[deleted]
- dijit 25d agoHow do they know that something will be a “substantial piece of work” then?
- dullcrisp 25d agoAs you claim to understand, they don’t know things, they sort of drift on vibes. Telling them to refuse things they think will be hard will only accomplish making them more annoying.