logoalt Hacker News

nmehneryesterday at 7:04 PM2 repliesview on HN

There is a difference between the LLM and the agent.

If you look at the agent: https://openai.com/business/guides-and-resources/a-practical...

This is more like a fuzzy way of scripting using LLMs than anything emergent. And this is exactly my question: For the given agents: How much was scripted and how much "intelligence" is really in there.


Replies

pixl97yesterday at 7:22 PM

>fuzzy way of scripting using LLMs than anything emergent

Then go take some old models and plug them in your harness versus newer models. I mean this is a conjecture that is nearly instantly provable, go on ahead. If it's just the harness and not the system of both you should be able to show it easily.

Meanwhile I was reading about someone using the latest GLM and Claude in a harness with the same set of prompts making a raw image decoder/encoder and the GLM was far more intelligent in the task than Claude was. When presented with knowledge that claude was wrong it wouldn't change its mind. GLM would (aka a sign of intelligence). GLM was far more likely to stop work and start on another path when the likelihood of a successful completion was unlikely.

show 1 reply
cloverichtoday at 3:28 AM

very little intelligence that is the whole problem, really. actual intelligence wont likely nuke the species providing for its existence. But a highly capable sub intelligent model might.

show 1 reply