| ▲ | milkshakes 5 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
i never assumed that, and i do keep up with the publications. i'm also not saying it's a dumb thing to do! what i am saying is that empirically, it appears that distillation of a more advanced model is a required first step for them to train a borderline competitive, cheaper model. in effect, their training is subsidized by the frontier labs. if this were not the case, then we would be observing chinese models that far surpass frontier models in capabilities, rather than "almost as good, but much cheaper", and we would be having a very different conversation. what happens to these efforts when the subsidy is cut off? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | InsideOutSanta 4 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> empirically, it appears that distillation of a more advanced model is a required first step I see no evidence for that. > if this were not the case, then we would be observing chinese models that far surpass frontier models It's pretty clear that the primary reason for the difference is budget and compute availability. Chinese labs have at least an order of magnitude less money than Anthropic and OpenAI. > what happens to these efforts when the subsidy is cut off? They will continue making progress as they do now, minus the benefits of distillation. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||