antonly

It's very refreshing to read such clearly written and concise technical reports.

I am not sure there are many instances where I would be comfortable uploading my slides to a random website?

It really pains me to read the responses here to this and the AHM statements. It feels like HN people here are talking with such... privilege. These are the smartest people on the planet saying "hey, please don't do this, it's seriously hampering our work in this field". And then people on here say that mathematicians are... gate keeping? Not embracing progress? Who are you to say that? How do you know? What happened to empathy for others? I don't understand you all...

What did they do with their benchmarks? I've never seen Qwen3.6 27B this close to Qwen3.8 27B in any aggregated summary... Makes one questions the entire accuracy section.

I wonder how common of a problem this will be in the future. The experiment will fail due to improper setup, the human will at best glance over the logs and declare victory, and everyone just believes.

How do we know free tier models will continue to provide adequate services? They are pretty good right now, but only because all big players are happy to burn enormous amounts of money.

But it won't even do that. In the pursuit of extracting maximal capital, better models with "better" knowledge will be gated behind higher prices. If you pay more, you get more.

How does it help equalise, if the commodity is sold "at market value" by the richest, and all intellectual input is immediately fed back into the tool. Looks at best like a weapon to supress

How is it an equalising force if the commodity is sold at "market value"? This will just lead to more wealth concentration, no?