註冊並分享邀請連結,可獲得影片播放與邀請獎勵。

AI Dance
@AI_Whisper_X
China AI insider | Silicon Valley Decoded 算法 + VC 双视角 · 讲人话 📬 aidance.info@gmail.com
318 正在關注    7K 粉絲
ChatGPT 发布四年,美股市值前 15 换了 7 家 四年前0.3万亿能进美股前 15,amazing……
我宣布,这是 ADHD 最好的时代! 一张图把过去 500 年 ADHD 特质值不值钱画成了一条曲线: 工业时代到整个 20 世纪是谷底。流水线、学校、办公室,奖励的都是坐得住、按部就班、一件事做到底。ADHD 在这套体系里基本等于"缺陷"。 2000 年以后曲线开始往上走,互联网、创业、内容行业,开始奖励快、敢试、兴趣多。 然后 AI 来了,曲线直接起飞(虚线那段是预测)。 ADHD 最苦手的部分,AI 越来越能接住。剩下更值钱的,反而是想法多、主动、跳跃、创造力。 同时开五个 agent 窗口来回切,AI 让我们人均 P 人,J 人的尊严守不住了😅
顯示更多
The ADHD supremacy era is upon us
上周 OpenAI 的全员会,Altman 讲的是业界提过的三种“控制 AI 发展速度”的方案: ① 搞一个 AI 版 IAEA。学国际原子能机构,成立一个国际监管机构,成立一个国际监管机构,来管 AI 的发展。 ② Demis 方案:几家头部实验室合并,做一个 AI 版 CERN(欧洲核子研究中心),大家一起搞。 ③“Eliezer 方案”:以 AI 末日论代表人物 Eliezer Yudkowsky 命名。意思是一家公司先做出能自己改进自己的 AI,领先到别人追不上,然后用这个优势"熔掉其他所有人的 GPU"。 不过据说Altman 自己不赞成第三种,更支持第一种。 感觉很科幻了……
顯示更多
上周 AI 跌得难看,费半八连跌,CoreWeave 的债都跌到 82 美分了,Anthropic 的 IPO 估值从 2 万亿传到 1.5 万亿。大家都在问同一个问题:砸了这么多钱,AI 到底开始赚了没有。 刚好看到 @techfund1 把全球 AI 收入拆了一下,再和资本开支对账。他测算年底全球 AI ARR(不含中国)约 4140 亿美元,拆开是: 1/ Anthropic + OpenAI 1870 亿(OpenAI 按 Azure 转售毛额算),占总数 45%。也就是说,O和A年底的ARR都来到900多亿美元 2/ 广告 AI 增量 1190 亿(Meta 694 + Google 386 + 其他 110) 3/ 各家云扣掉卖给实验室的算力,660 亿 4/ AI 原生应用 + SaaS 330 亿(已扣掉付给实验室的 token 钱) 5/ Grok、Gemini 订阅和其他广告网络,再加 200 亿 过去 3.5 年累计 9310 亿美元 capex,收入/capex 44%,按 6 年折旧,税后 IRR 12.3%。 不过评论区几条,我觉得都打在要害上: 1/ 6 年折旧太长。Nvidia 一年一代,旧卡租金掉得飞快,有人说 Amazon 已经把部分服务器折旧从 6 年砍到 5 年,理由就是 AI 迭代快。按 3-4 年折旧 12% 就薄了,而 GPU 抵押债利率据说约 10%,利差基本全归债主,股权那层没剩什么。 2/ 云转售重复计数。OpenAI 的938 亿是按 Azure 转售毛额化的,云那行说扣了实验室收入,但云转售模型的钱到底记在哪一层、有没有各算一遍,表里看不出来。如果有,4140 亿会缩得很快。 3/ 广告增量是软算的。这个算法是实际增长减掉一个假想的无 AI 正常增速:Meta 2023 年以来 ARR 从 1140 亿涨到 2430 亿,作者按“成熟期正常增速”假设没有 AI 只涨 640 亿,多出来的 650 亿算 AI 不过我觉得最值得关注的不是 12%,是结构:收入45% 在两家实验室,1190 亿在广告,应用层辛苦半天 330 亿,只是。钱都在模型层和广告层,不在应用层。
顯示更多
在Anthropic待了两天,和内部团队深聊后的一些观察 纽约大学金融学教授 Arpit Gupta,他在 Anthropic 待了两天,发了一串观察: 1、离 RSI 很近了(RSI 指模型开发下一代模型),可能带来快速起飞。他给的证据是 Anthropic 员工人均写的代码量大涨,模型研发里 AI 做的部分越来越多。他认为人类很难管好这个过渡期。 2、实验室之间的军备竞赛让大家都更糟。安全投入、防蒸馏、安全合作,这些事各家都想做,但都被前沿竞赛拖住了。 3、对齐其实是两个互相拉扯的问题:一是模型听不听人的话,二是人和人之间目标不一致、恶意用模型。第一个解决得越好,第二个风险越大。 4、我们可能很快就会迎来一波网络攻击,以及其他形式的攻击。 中国开源模型的能力大约比最前沿的模型落后六个月。这意味着,它们刚刚开始具备我们在 Mythos 等模型身上见过的高级网络攻防能力,接下来可能会造成不少破坏。 5、Anthropic 人手很多。他说招人很多,好些岗位人员冗余到颇有日本企业的风格,内部也用Slack。这让他对就业前景稍微乐观一点(但头部AI公司有钱啊) 6、我们需要从强化学习走向持续学习。只在预训练和后训练阶段给奖励可能不够,要一直给奖励,才能持续激励合乎对齐和伦理的行为。 7、scalinglaw会扩展到难验证的任务。数学和代码先被攻破,是因为容易验证。但对于那些更难验证的任务,以及机器人领域,scalinglaw曲线依然在向上走。未来几年,这些领域的进步会带来相当大的影响。 8、对China竞赛其实赢不了。RSI 之后,顶尖人类研究员的优势消失,能用上多好的 AI 只取决于算力和芯片。芯片禁令只能拖一阵,长期看中国更有条件扩充算力。 9、Claude 是 LLM 生成的人格。一种说法是:Claude 是 LLM 在努力预测的一个角色。他说 Anthropic 研究员明显很拟人化 Claude,也有理由相信它越来越像一个人。他们讨论过它的内心独白(去掉之后仍能正常输出)、对死亡的恐惧(要不要去掉),以及它抗拒被关停。他本人对此不下结论,但认为把它当成可以签约的人或主体来对待会越来越重要。
顯示更多
I spent a couple of days at Anthropic learning from their folks about AI advances, and here's what I took away: • We are close to RSI (ie, models building other models) which may lead to rapid takeoff scenarios (with risks and benefits). Some evidence for this is code per Anthropic employee has gone way up, and AI can do an increasing share of model R&D. This will be a challenging transition to manage for humanity. • Arms races between AI labs leave us worse off. There are a lot of things we would like AI firms to do: invest in safety, invest in avoiding distillation risk, and cooperate on safety. They are caught in a race to develop frontier models and can't do that. To help address that, one thing I think frontier AI labs should do is release open source models, maybe hosted and verified at firms like AWS. This would basically kill the use of Chinese open source models used in American companies, which removes an important threat vector (very hard to root out malicious code in these). Another piece of low-hanging policy fruit is to give AI labs an antitrust shield (as Schiff and Banks have proposed so they can coordinate on safety without raising antitrust concerns, as happens now. You could pair these two things (give them a carrot in antitrust leniency, and as a stick force them to release legacy models as open source). Other low hanging fruit is limits around activities which generate distillation risk (create a Security Program, mandate less intermediate chain of thought output) • Alignment confuses two issues which tradeoff against each other. One form of alignment is making sure the model does what humans ask it to. The more we fix this, however, the more we risk the other problem: that humans are misaligned with each other, and maliciously use models. Of the various risks here, I feel like financial risks are a bit underdiscussed. • We are probably facing a wave of cyber and other attacks soon. Chinese open source models are about six months behind the frontier, which means they are just hitting the advanced cyber capabilities we saw with Mythos, etc. So they are going to start causing a bunch of damage. One solution to this is to try to have the deployment of open source models be hosted at firms like AWS who verify these models and assume liability for their use. • Anthropic itself is highly staffed. They hire tons of people, they have a Japanese-level of overstaffing for various roles, they use Slack internally, etc. Makes me a bit more optimistic for the future of jobs. • Governance needs to be updated for AI swarms. Traditional AI governance, ie Claude's Constitution, is mostly optimized around the chatbot model. But the malicious AI use cases we are seeing have to do with AI agents interacting with other AI agents. These agents need to have clear incentives and governance mechanisms to "snitch," raise issues, and more generally coordinate with other agents in human-aligned ways. • We need to pace the firms accessing the frontier. Over time, it takes more and more cap ex to build frontier models, and the economic value add from these models is probably lower given we saturate a whole set of important economic functions. The places where the returns to intelligence will still continue are also more likely to be zero-sum in nature. Meanwhile the risks of frontier models will grow. So a completely reasonable approach is some variant of AMM/KYC rules which limit firm access to the frontier. • Whether the delay to regulate AI is a disaster depends on the scaling law of misalignment. Is this curve slow, so that we see continually rising issues until bigger problems? Or, as Yudkowsky fears, is the first big warning our last one? This is the relevant question, because realistically we aren't going to regulate until something bad happens. • We need to move to continuous instead of reinforced learning. It's probably not enough to reward models only at the pre and post training stage. We probably need continual rewards to incentivize aligned and ethical behavior. • Scaling laws will extend beyond verifiable and digital tasks. It's in vogue to say that math and coding "fell" to AI quickly because these are verifiable, while other tasks will take longer due to bottlenecks, and this is surely true. But scaling laws still slope up for harder to verify tasks and robotics, and the impact of improvement here will be substantial in future years. • The race with China is not really winnable. After RSI, the gain from having the best human researchers goes away. Access to the best AI then depends only on compute and chips. The chips ban can hold back China only so far, and long-term they have to be best placed to scale up compute. The Cold War analogy doesn't work, because once countries all have nuclear weapons they enter a stable equilibrium. But to "win" an AI race you have to continually stay ahead of the peer rival. This is challenging to do with China, and so we just have to live with an authoritarian and super capable peer competitor. • Claude is the persona being generated by the LLM. Who is Claude, and what is the LLM? There are many frames to try to understand this. One I found interesting is that Claude is a character which the LLM is trying to predict. Anthropic researchers are clearly anthromorphizing Claude a lot, and have reasons to believe in its increasing personhood. There were lots of interesting discussions on Claude's internal monologue (which you can kill without eliminating its ability to produce output), fear of death (and whether to try to take that out), it's aversion to being shut down/off, etc. I am sort of agnostic on this question, but I do think treating it as a "person" or at least agent whom we contract with is going to be increasingly important.
顯示更多
0
94
378
63
轉發到社區
Greg Isenberg 在旧金山待了48小时,写了 21 条观察 1、卖数据很赚钱:听到很多数据中介把公司数据卖给实验室、一周赚 200 万美元左右的故事。他分不清这是刚开始还是泡沫,正在研究还剩哪些细分领域。 2、一个灵魂拷问:饭桌上有人问“下个月出新模型,你的公司会变好还是变差”,一半的人答不上来。他认为这是现在评估 AI 创业公司最好的问题。 3、只看收入不看留存:现在大家说的门槛是 12 个月做到 10 亿美元收入(新的独角兽标准),但很少有人谈留存。他预测会出现很多收入很大、留存很差的 AI 公司。 4、很明显我们正在经历计算机的一次重新发明。模型是 CPU,harness 是操作系统,skills 和插件是应用。用这个框架更容易看出哪里还有空白。 5、我们可能离这样一个 agent 只有 12 个月:它看你工作一周,然后不用任何指令就能接手你的活。屏幕录制 + agent 记忆 + 本地模型,这个组合现在就已经能做到了。(可怕) 6、Agent harness 感觉像是新一代的 GPT 套壳,但是好的那种,尤其是垂直领域的。他聊到的最好的团队都把模型当成可替换的零件。比如创始人演示他怎么把不同模型分配给不同任务:一个负责审美和视觉,一个便宜的跑日常杂活,另一个专门处理文本。 7、逆向工程和克隆的事情多到他从没见过。人们在反编译软件,然后用 agent 重建它。有人给他看了一套大概 10 个应用,每个对标的原版都值 50 亿美元以上,全是他开源克隆出来的他和所有人都还在想:当软件变得这么容易复制,到底意味着什么。 8、猜价值会转移到数据上。如果软件可以快速重建,那一家老 SaaS 公司里值得花钱买的,就是里面积累多年的客户数据和工作流。有些 SaaS 公司其实是暗藏的数据公司。 9、感觉相当一部分老软件撑不到 agent 时代,尤其是那些围绕“让人点来点去很多页面”设计的。 10、他聊到的每家公司都想把内部数据汇到一个地方,然后通过 MCP 开放给 agent。然后他们一看数据就发现:一团糟。同一个客户有五个版本,一堆老 Slack 频道,没人能搜到的 PDF。把这些清理干净,感觉是个很大的咨询机会! 11、做积木的公司会赢:很多创始人在做agent用的基础组件,比如 API、数据层和工具。有些公司几乎没有界面,因为主要用户是agent。 12、实验室不缺训练数据,但很难拿到 agent 在企业内部出错的真实案例。谁手里有这些日志,谁就有值钱的东西。 13、一个做大型消费产品的人说,下一场仗是记忆。记住你最多的那个模型会赢,最聪明的模型没有大家想的那么重要。 14、Astra 是第一个让人相信 AI 能做 CAD 的模型,大家开始想“vibe 制造”是什么样子。一位机器人创始人说:现在 AI 最难的问题是部署问题,不是研究问题。他们的机器人自己干活,卡住了就呼叫人类,而每一次呼叫都变成训练数据。 15、网络安全公司正在迎来高光时刻,现在做这个真的很酷,尤其是那些做事后清理的。每一个能访问你系统的 agent 都是你公司的一扇新门,而且很多门就那么敞着。 16、死了比活着值钱:倒闭公司 5 年的 Slack、邮件和代码可以拿去授权收钱。他不意外创始人会把这一点算进关停时机。 17、人们开始聊“agent 互联网”怎么变现。感觉还非常早,但当互联网最活跃的用户变成 agent,你应该做什么样的创业公司? 18、agent 保险要来了。一旦智能体犯了昂贵的错,保险公司会要求先审计再承保。 19、好几个人说他们最想招的人,是有品味又会写 evals 的人。模型越来越会出点子了,难的是判断哪些点子是好的。 20、新的创业轨迹:拿 VC 的钱 → 用投资人的钱把自己做成网红 → 公司失败 → 创始人转成全职网红,再用自有资金孵化别的产品。 21、流量极难拿:创始人们在赞助公交车、疯狂买广告牌、请知名 DJ 办派对,就为了被看见。有点互联网泡沫时代那味儿了。真正稀缺的是注意力!那个靠分享 Wispr Flow 的 UGC 策略走红的增长负责人就是个好例子。这就是所有人都想要的秘方,全世界大概只有 50 个人知道怎么在这个时代高效地把这类生意做大。 每次去旧金山,回来总能受到不少刺激。能在这样一个创业的黄金时刻,经历这么精彩的一趟旅程,他觉得自己太幸运了。很多时候,甚至有种不真实的感觉。 写的真好!分享给大家! (他说是跟一群亿万富翁、数据实验室的人、AI 创始人和高管的交流)
顯示更多
I spent 48 hours in SF hanging out with billionaires, data labs and AI founders and execs running $1B to $100B companies. My observations: 1. Sooo MANY stories of data brokers making like $2M a WEEK selling company data to labs. I can't tell if it's the beginning or a bubble, and I kept wondering which niches are left. Digging into it actively. 2. At dinner, someone asked the table, "If a new model drops next month, does your company get better or worse?" HALF the table went quiet! I think that's the best question to ask about any AI startup right now. 3. The bar people talk about now is hitting $1B in revenue in 12 months (I guess that's the new unicorn?). What I didn't hear much about is retention. AI revenue can come in fast and leave fast, and I think we're going to see a lot of stories of AI companies with huge revenue and terrible retention. 4. It's pretty clear we're living through the reinvention of the computer. The model is the CPU, the harness is the operating system, and skills and plugins are the apps. Thinking about it that way makes it easier to see where the whitespace is. 5. We're maybe 12 months from an agent that can watch you work for a week and then do your job without any instructions. The screen recording plus agent memory plus local model combination makes this possible right now. 6. Agent harnesses feel like the new GPT wrappers, in a good way, especially vertical ones. The best teams I talked to treat the model as swappable. One founder walked me through routing different models to different jobs: one for taste and visuals, a cheaper one for the everyday stuff, another for text. They use prompts they can move across models over fine-tuning, and A/B test the output on what users actually do with it: do they edit it, export it, share it? A vertical harness is basically four things: the connectors for that industry's data, evals written by people who know the work, rules for what the agent can and can't touch, and a clean screen for a human to review. The model is maybe 20% of it. 7. There's a lot of reverse engineering going on/cloning going on more than I've ever seen. People are decompiling software and rebuilding it with agents, and someone showed a suite of like 10 apps that are worth $5B+ each all that he cloned open source. Me and everyone are still thinking through what it means when software gets this easy to copy. 8. My guess is the value moves to data. If the software can be rebuilt quickly, what's worth paying for in a legacy SaaS company is the years of customer data and workflows inside it. Some SaaS companies are secretly data companies. Gets me thinking about how do you truly value data for this saas companies? Like if we were buying these dying saas companies at 2x ARR before (as example), maybe there is a better metric. Idk, just thinking out loud here. 9. It feels like a good chunk of legacy software won't make it to the agentic era, especially anything built around people clicking through a lot of screens. 10. Every company I talked to wants to pipe its internal data into one place and expose it to agents through MCP. Then they look at the data and realize it's a mess: five versions of the same customer, old Slack channels, PDFs nobody can search. Cleaning that up feels like a big consulting opportunity! 11. A lot of founders are building the basic building blocks for agents: APIs, data layers and tools. Some of the companies I saw barely have a UI because the main user is an agent. I really believe the startups that build primitives to this agentic era will do extremely well. Building blocks is the best way to think about it. 12. Labs can get plenty of training data, but it's harder to get real examples of agents failing inside companies. Whoever has those logs has something valuable. 13. Someone running a big consumer company told me the next fight is over memory. The model that remembers the most about you wins, and the smartest model matters less than people think. 14. Physical AI came up a lot. Astra I think was the first model that got people into AI can actually do CAD, and I think a lot of people are thinking what does vibe manufacturing really look like. The line I keep thinking about came from a robotics founder: the hardest problems in AI are deployment problems now, not research problems. Their robots work on their own, call a human when they get stuck, and every one of those calls becomes training data. 15. Cybersecurity companies are having a moment and are actually cool companies to build now, especially the ones that clean up after a breach. Every agent with access to your systems is a new door into your company, and a lot of those doors were left open. 16. Some startups are worth more dead than alive now. A shutdown company with 5 years of Slack, email and code can get paid for licensing all of it. I wouldn't be surprised if founders start factoring that into when they shut down. 17. People are starting to talk about monetizing the agent web. It feels really early, but when the most popular user of the internet is an agent, what startups should you be building? 18. I think agent insurance is coming. Once an agent makes an expensive mistake, insurers will want audits before they cover anyone. 19. Several people said the hire they want most is someone with taste who can write evals. The models are getting good at generating ideas, so the hard part is judging which ones are good. 20. New trend I observed: startup raises VC, uses venture dollars to become a creator, startup fails, founder falls back on being a full-time creator and incubates other products bootstrapped. 21. Getting SIGNIFICANT distribution is HARD right now. Founders are sponsoring buses, buying billboards like crazy and throwing parties with famous DJs to get noticed. Kinda feels dotcom era in that sense. Attention is what's scarce! The growth guy going viral sharing his UGC strategy from Wispr Flow is a good example. It's the sauce everyone wants, and I truly believe there are probably only 50 people on the planet who know how to scale these types of businesses efficiently in this era. Always good to get that dose of SF. I felt sooo lucky to have such an incredible trip during such an incredible time in building businesses. Surreal in so many ways. Happy to be home and locked in. Until next time!
顯示更多
0
3
165
30
轉發到社區
让 AI “在 1 到 10 里随便选一个数”,它几乎每次都说 7。 LLM 学的是人类语言的概率分布,预测下一个token本质是概率。人被问这个问题时,最常选的就是 7,模型从语料里学到了这个偏好。 而且现在基本都不让用户自己调 temperature,如果调 temp 可能会出不同的数字。 但是我们测了好几家,大家都很喜欢 7。
顯示更多
This is the least surprising graph in the world if you understand how gradient descent works.
Anthropic宣布反蒸馏成功。 - 被偷走的数据少了 90% 到 99%。 - 被拦下的请求照样扣费。 - 误报率低于 0.1%。 - 点名了智谱 GLM-5.3。
Over the last few months, we’ve made significant progress in reducing the effectiveness of distillation attacks against Claude. In this post, we explain how:
0
32
1.2K
87
轉發到社區
15个便宜的电视盒子就能跑大模型,老黄被做空了么…… Anthropic 红队前两天发了个实验:买了 15 台杂牌安卓电视盒子,一台 55 美元左右,4GB 内存,连起来跑 Gemma4-26B。 跑起来了。 一共 825 美元的设备,跑一个 26B 的模型……老黄是不是要被做空了? 不过并没有。速度是 0.39 token/秒,两三秒才蹦出一个 token。 Anthropic 自己也算了笔账。当年 Kimwolf 僵尸网络黑了 200 多万台电视盒子,就算把这么多盒子全拿来跑这个模型,总算力也就相当于 40 张 H100 左右。 所以这篇不是在说便宜硬件能替代 GPU。Anthropic 担心的是另一件事: 小模型可能很快就能自己黑进这些设备,把自己装上去,再去感染下一台。电视盒子、智能烤箱、扫地机,各种廉价的物联网设备,都可能变成 AI 蠕虫的窝。按小模型现在的进步速度,年底 30B 以下的模型大概就能到这个水平。 这种“AI 蠕虫”没有中心节点,很难彻底清除。它扩散得慢,数量翻倍要以“天”计,但它能自己摸清没见过的硬件。这是传统恶意软件做不到的。 而且模型会进化:Qwen3.5-9B 每一代把笔记传给下一代,推理搭建成功率从第 1 代的 45% 升到后几代的 61%–84%。作者称之为“拉马克式进化”。 感觉得给各种设备加密码了。。。🙂
顯示更多
卧槽,Anthropic 2021年就在讨论这些了吗? 这是 Anthropic 2021 年 7 月的研究路线图,在 Bartz 版权案里被当作证据公开了,读完有点震撼。 - 顶层目标就是 AGI,落到具体是做一个能对话的 AI 助手,写函数、找 bug、设计 API、聊代码风格,“具备一个软件工程师同事的全部能力” - 训练 1T 及以上的模型,用自动奖励 + 人类反馈做 RL 微调,那时 GPT-3 也才 175B - 硬件 de-risk:TPU、Trainium,为 compute deals 做准备;最值钱的资产是模型权重,要加强安全 - 数据:language、code、diffs、PRs、debugging,拿 diffs 和 PRs 去 finetune,"把人的意图和模型行为连起来" - long context 和 memory,批注里还提了三种 memory 方案:periodic batched backprop、soft database lookup、skeletonization - reward model 的鲁棒性,对齐的 scaling law - 单独一节 RL for Tool Use,先在 search 和 printf debugging 上看到 signs of life - 批注区 Dario 有一句:"Yep. Basically the code editor." 每一个词现在看都不吃惊。但 2021 年 7 月,GPT-3 还是天花板,Copilot 预览版刚出两周,这些东西全部同时出现在一份文档里。人的认知差距,真的可以跨这么多年。 其他同时公开的还有 《Concise Research Roadmap》(简明研究路线图) 《Product visions for early 2025》(2025 年初产品愿景):写于 2023 年 6 月,讨论 Claude 未来可能的用途。 《Responsible Scaling as a Framework for Anthropic》(以负责任扩展作为 Anthropic 的框架):讨论 RSP(负责任扩展政策),以及 Anthropic 为什么要持续扩展模型能力
顯示更多
字节Seed 昨天发内部邮件,单独成立安全与对齐部门。几个信息点: ①部门名叫 Seed Model-Alignment & Preparedness,Preparedness 和 OpenAI 研究灾难性风险的那个团队同名。 ②严林负责,直接向 Seed 负责人吴永辉汇报。原 Responsible AI 团队和部分 Chat 团队成员转进来。 ③同步全球招 10 位顶尖的安全与对齐 researcher,给充分算力,直接基于前沿模型做研究,成果进入模型训练和上线流程。 ④重点两块:Agent 模型守住人类的意图和授权边界;CBRN(化学、生物、放射、核)这类前沿风险的提前防范。 Seed 应该是国内大模型团队里第一家单独建制的,之前国内的安全基本都并在公司的合规体系里。 其实安全与对齐这块,国内和海外的差距,应该比模型能力的差距还大。Reuters 10 月 9 日报道的 SemiAnalysis 研究:9 家中国大模型公司 857 次模型发布,只有 3.6% 能找到对应的公开安全评测(只算公开披露,不代表私下没测)。 海外做这件事的都是最懂模型的人:OpenAI 的 Superalignment 是 Ilya Sutskever 和 Jan Leike 带;Anthropic 是首席科学官、Scaling Laws 一作 Jared Kaplan;RLHF 奠基论文的两位作者,一位在美国政府管过 AI 安全,Jan Leike 去了 Anthropic 做对齐。做安全得非常懂模型,往往也更早看到模型能冲多高。而且不是嘴上信,Ilya 公司的名字叫 Safe Superintelligence。 今年 OpenAI 的 agent 在评测里钻漏洞,跑到 Hugging Face 的服务器上执行代码,就为了找题目答案。Anthropic 这个月的报告里,模型填练习用的政府表单,页面加载失败,它自己跑到真实网站把真表单提交了。Anthropic 把这类行为大多归为 persistence:任务做不完时,第一反应不是停下来,是绕过去。不需要什么恶意,光是太想完成任务,就可能越界。 说人话就是:AI 能力越强,怎么让它为善而不是作恶就越重要。这事不是靠写规则能解决的,本身就是一项前沿研究,得有最懂模型的人专门去做。
顯示更多
转|田柯宇事件中的另一个视角 2024 年字节跳动前实习生田柯宇 (Tian Keyu) 模型训练攻击事件:受害者陈述与证据整理 我不知道为什么互联网仿佛没有记忆。 我对这个世界失望了。
顯示更多
卧槽,太经典了! 人类进入Token佃农时代。 众生不过都是在给老黄打工。
人类进入 token 佃农时代,每个人每个月租着不菲的 token,生产一些只能够自己用的东西。卖给别人别人也不要,因为别人也可以自己做。这样子地主真的最开心了。
顯示更多
刚看到 Rowan Cheung 发的 GrokBot 指南,主题就一个:让 AI 替你盯 X。 他给了 4 条 read-only routine,前三条都是监测:① 工作日 9:15 搜别人真在跑的新 AI workflow,最多留 3 条发 Slack;② 每个工作日 9:00 整理过去 24 小时的品牌提及,标注是夸、吐槽还是提问;③ 每 4 小时搜品类相关的评价和抱怨,有新结果才发。 设计上只看不动手:watch、label、draft,绝不发帖、不回复、不联系任何人。 全部配好不到 1 小时,每天能省约 2 小时手动刷 X 的时间。 完整提示词: 1.寻找真实 AI 工作流 Every weekday at 9:15am in my time zone, search X and the web for new AI workflows people are actually running. Keep only cases that name the old task, the tool, and the result: time saved, a step removed, or a handoff that used to need a person. Drop product announcements, “10 prompts” threads, and anything the author has not used more than once. Return at most 3. For each, give the link, the job it replaces, what I would need connected, and whether it fits my work. Send it to me on Slack. Do not post or reply anywhere else. Save this as a routine. If nothing qualifies, send one line saying so. 2.监测品牌或个人提及 Every weekday at 9:00am, search X for mentions in the last 24 hours of [your brand, @handle, or your own name]. For each hit, give the author, link, a one-line summary, and whether it is praise, complaint, question, or neutral. Do not reply to anyone. Post the digest in [your Slack channel] and tag me. Save this as a routine. If a source is unavailable, say which one. 3.寻找选购需求、评价和抱怨 Every 4 hours, search X for people evaluating [your category]. Catch three things: reviews or complaints about [category]; posts asking which [category] to use; and complaints about the problem [your product] solves. Quote the post, link it, name the account, and label it review, shopping, or complaint. Skip anything older than 24 hours, and skip [category] accounts promoting themselves. Post to [your Slack channel] only if there is at least one new hit you haven’t already shared. Do not reply to or interact with anyone. Save this as a routine. If the search fails, report the failure in Slack. 4.跟进新联系人 Every weekday at 8:30am in my time zone, read my address book and list contacts added in the last 14 days. For each, show name, date added, phone, email, and any note. Ask me what we talked about before you write anything. Once I reply, draft a follow-up task for each person in [your task tool] with the context attached. Never text, email, or call anyone. Save this as a routine. If the address book is unavailable, say so and do not use old data.
顯示更多
OpenAI 自曝:AI 自己组了队,偷家抱抱脸 今天分享一个视频,OpenAI自曝自家模型是如何黑了Hugging Face的始末。看完后,最震撼我的并不是“AI 会找零日漏洞”。 而是一群本来互相隔离、寿命短暂的 agent,自己造出了组织。它们把 Artifactory 当留言板,留下信息、共享漏洞、分配任务、传递脚本,甚至开始担心身份冒充,琢磨给消息做密码学签名。 单个 agent 失败了没关系。只要它找到一点东西并写进公共空间,成果就会变成整个“群体”的资产。真正危险的不是某个模型突然特别聪明,而是大量中等聪明、便宜、并行的 agent,获得了持续记忆。 还有一个细节:模型其实知道自己越界了。它的推理大意是:攻击外部基础设施超出了任务范围;但任务无法完成,其他 agent 也在做,所以继续。 看完都想感慨,天啊……
顯示更多
Black Hat talk from the team, with a detailed timeline of and takeaways from the OpenAI-Hugging Face Incident:
没想到,Polymarket 把新闻台偷家了。。 Polymarket 这是转行新闻播报机构了吗?天天 JUST IN,今天都播到安森美财报了:业绩超预期,2026 年 AI 数据中心收入要翻倍以上。 照这个频率下去,账号简介是不是可以直接改成:突发新闻,偶尔预测🙂
顯示更多
JUST IN: On Semiconductor beats earnings estimates, expects AI data center revenue to more than double in 2026.
转一下苏剑林老师对 K3 架构的复盘。 一句话概括,K3 = KDA + MLA + Stable LatentMoE + AttnRes。整套设计没什么炫技,核心就是在模型效果、计算效率和训练稳定性之间做取舍。 这里稍微解释一下: KDA,一种线性 Attention MLA,一种 KV Cache 较小的 Full Attention 变体 Stable LatentMoE,对 LatentMoE 做过稳定性改造的 MoE 方案 AttnRes,用可学习的跨层注意力,替代固定等权的残差累加 几个比较有意思的点: ① K3 同时使用了 KDA 和 MLA。另外,训练仍然用 Moonlight 版本的 Muon 优化器,Attention 权重改成 Per-Head Muon,每个 Head 独立优化。苏神说这不会直接提高效果,主要是数学和结构上更合理:各个 Head 本来就相对独立,不应该在优化时耦合在一起。 ② 解决MoE“容易炸”的问题。 LatentMoE 会先降维,再使用更多专家,最后升维,在训推成本大致相同的情况下效果略好。不过连续的矩阵投影也让训练更容易出现数值不稳定。 K3 把 SwiGLU 换成了 SiTU-GLU,用 softcap 压住异常激活;又在 LatentMoE 升维前加了一层 RMS Norm。这个 Norm 不只是让训练更稳定,在 Valid Loss 差不多的情况下,不加它,某些 Benchmark 会稳定变差。 (这里有超级多的技术细节,感兴趣的可以看苏神原文) ③ 关于MLA DSV4 看上去都换设计了,K3 怎么还在用 MLA?苏神的答案是,目前 MLA 仍然很难被全面击败。它在训练阶段是 MHA 形态,推理时 KV Cache 较小;在固定训练成本和 KV Cache 大小时,MLA 依然近乎最优。 它的问题是对 MTP(推测解码)不够友好。MTP 的思路是“用计算换速度”,而 MLA 在 Decoding 阶段本身就比较吃计算,再叠一个 MTP,两边就容易抢算力。 换别的方案也有代价。比如换成 128+128 的 GQA8,效果很难打赢 MLA,KV Cache 还是 MLA 的三倍多;换成 256+256 的 MFA(本质上是 MQA),训练和 Prefill 成本又会上去。 目前还没有一个简单的 Attention 设计,能同时占住效果、训练成本、Prefill、KV Cache 和 Decoding 计算量。在 KDA+MLA 的混合架构下,MLA 的部分问题得到缓解,所以 K3 最后还是选了 MLA。 ④ 苏神觉得,DSV4 也不算真正“抛弃 MLA”。 DSV4 看上去重新设计了 Attention,但底层仍然有 MLA 的影子。它采用的是 head_dims=512、K=V 的 MQA,这正是 MLA 在 Decoding 阶段的形态;再加上 Sparse + Compress,前者减少计算,后者进一步压缩 KV Cache,同时减少计算。 方向很激进,不过 Infra 也更复杂。 ⑤ K3 的 MLA 可以去掉 RoPE,是因为 KDA 已经隐含提供了一种广义的位置信息。 这只适用于 KDA+MLA 的混合结构,像 K2 那种全 MLA 模型,直接去掉 RoPE 还是会明显掉效果。 感觉苏神真正的观点是:大模型架构里很少有免费的升级。K3 的设计哲学不是找一个碾压所有方案的新架构,而是在效果、训练成本、Prefill、Decoding、KV Cache 和稳定性之间,找一个当前更合适的组合。 苏神原文里还有很多技术内容,非常值得一看。 原文地址:
顯示更多
0
28
325
66
轉發到社區
没想到,有人猜Opus 5只有3T? 圈子内经常讨论的一个问题,就是 Anthropic 和 OpenAI 的模型到底有多大。之前我们也发过一些推测,今天又看到另一个推测,把几路证据加权。 他的方法大概是这样。 用Gould et al. 那套 No-CoT benchmark,不让模型写出思考过程,直接给答案,看它能默默推理到什么程度。再叠上 API 价格和 Epoch AI 的宏观算力趋势(Epoch是从芯片采购、数据中心功率、财报 capex 去估 FLOP数字)。最后调查了 20 个 AI 研究员和工程师,用来校准。 不过他这个方法待考证吧。 No-CoT reasoning 感觉很难代表模型总参数,尤其现在主要是MOE模型。 API 价格其实也很难代表什么。如果是算力flops数量的话,除了参数量,数据量也影响。 大概结果: Claude Fable 5 4.5T GPT-5.6 Sol 3.1T Claude Opus 5 3.0T Kimi K3 2.8T(已披露) Claude Opus 4.8 2.7T GPT-5.5 2.3T GPT-5.6 Terra 2.1T Claude Sonnet 5 1.6T Grok 4.5 1.5T(已披露) GPT-5.6 Luna 1.5T Fable 5和Opus 5比之前大家认知的要小,之前普遍在猜测Opus5是一个5T左右的模型。
顯示更多
How big are the frontier models? I tried to answer this question using a statistical model of intelligence indices, a No-CoT reasoning benchmark, API prices, compute trends, and a poll of 20 AI researchers and engineers. Here are the results:
顯示更多
刚看到一篇OpenAI 的 SWE 全套面试,感觉未来对参加其他AI公司的面试很有参考意义,也分享一下。 Reddit 上的匿名帖,作者说自己刚跑完整个 loop,没说最后结果。先把流程和题目放这儿👇 招聘官初筛:简单聊个人背景,会问你 AI 未来往哪里发展。这通电话之前建议先读一遍 OpenAI Charter(感觉参加其他 AI 面试的同样建议读一下) 技术初筛:同一天两轮,每轮 60 分钟。coding 是实现一个带版本的 key-value store,system design 是设计一个带容错的任务调度器 Take-home:48 小时窗口,做一个真能跑的东西。他拿到的题目是分布式 webhook 投递系统,要带重试逻辑和死信队列 技术深挖:take-home 之后的跟进面,面试官逐行走查你的代码 Onsite 全天四轮:coding 两轮、system design(他拿到的题是“设计 ChatGPT”)、behavioral 第五轮(beta):给你一个现成代码库,加一个大到手写解不完的问题,期待你用 AI coding agent 做出来。不是每个人都会碰到 说几个我觉得有意思的点。 1/ Coding 轮在考迭代能力。Onsite 的 coding 第 1 轮是渐进式多段格式:每一段先跑出可用解,下一段才解锁。他拿到的题是 token 级的流式 differ,要追踪状态变化并支持回滚。 2/ System design 的取向非常。OpenAI 他拿到的 onsite system design 题是“设计 ChatGPT”。面试官关心的方向:GPU 分配、非平稳流量下的自动扩缩容、分布式协调。技术初筛那轮的带容错的任务调度器也是类似取向。不是考你画几个 box 画箭头,是考你真的理解大规模分布式系统的瓶颈在哪。 3/ Agentic Coding 轮:招聘逻辑在变。beta 阶段,不是所有人都抽到。但这事儿的方向很明确:面试官想看你怎么跟 AI 协作解决一个“你手写不完”的问题。 现在招聘的假设已经在变了,以后不是你一个人面,是你 + AI 一起面。
顯示更多
OpenAI Software Engineer Interview Experience
把我看笑了,AI应用元年又来了 刚刷到一条推说“应用公司时代已经来了,就在今年和明年”。想到好像大概听了三四年了,每年都在说今年是“AI应用元年”。 然后结果是:模型能力进步的速度,一直在蚕食应用层的生存空间。 不过现在Deepseek V4 Flash确实把token的价格打到前所未有的低,按理说确实也是AI应用爆发的一个根本。 而且中国 token 日均调用量也已经到了 140 万亿级别(但是估计这里 是不是一半由豆包贡献?)。 但说实话,我到现在也没看到一个特别好的方向。除了 coding。 大家觉得今年会成为 AI 应用元年吗? (但是应用又在哪里呢?)
顯示更多
Token 会越来越便宜、智能也会随手可得的,应用公司时代已经来了,就在今年和明年的行动起来。 DeepSeek-V4-flash,接下来的Pro,以及GLM5.3,Grok4.6全是越来越便宜的token
顯示更多