This seems like a technology heading in the right direction but not quiet there yet. Excited for what they are cooking up but probably won't start building around it yet.
This seems like a technology heading in the right direction but not quiet there yet. Excited for what they are cooking up but probably won't start building around it yet.
That being said, one thing having been unrealistic 10 years ago and just about possible today doesn't mean that it's going to change the world the same way another technically related, previously-impossible thing did. The Jev hype gives me a bit of the "you're still early to crypto" vibes of some later altcoins. I really like the idea, I think it's going to open up possibilities for using classifiers where we wouldn't or couldn't have trained one before. I'm crossing my fingers for an open weights version to drop. But it's still just a classifier, people have built similar things before Jev, the one thing that really stands out about it is their ability to generate hype.
That's the point. It can't. And it's not even close.
why
A bad universal classifier does suggest a good one later. And that is exactly what I would call "theoretically doable"
That said, I don't think that Jev is a magic breakthrough or anything. I think it is just a particularly good narrative with an easy way to try it out.
But I've seen nothing to indicate that the upper bound on classification tasks of a Jev-like model can exceed a frontier LLM with reasoning tokens. That seems nearly impossible even in principle (since Jev-style models are still based on LLM pretraining).
So while they're definitely on the Pareto frontier, which is valuable, they're at the "cheap" end of the spectrum more than the "good" end and I don't expect that to change.
The magic moment for me from the Jev release was not that there was some system playing doom: Rather it was the moment, they just changed a part of the prompt to "don't shoot, just dodge" and the behavior changed immediately.
This means you can have a system with fast decision-making but still interact with it via language.
They even named the model after "Jevons Paradoxon" - They anticipate that their model lowers the cost of adopting this kind of AI significantly, unlocking a lot of use cases.
But good enough for pennies in an instant is very useful.
I work in manufacturing. I think this will be fantastic for stuff like SPC.
Ie the famous "Hotdog" clip from Silicon Valley [0]
Example (2022):
https://developers.openai.com/cookbook/examples/zero-shot_cl...
> get stuck in strange loops of going in and out of the same door to no end
Math.random is statistically unlikely to do this.
> the most interesting thing about this jev stuff
> is that people are seemingly like
> completely disinterested in how smart it actually is
> I haven't even heard it mentioned a single time how it actually compares to other LLMs coming up with their own classifications. Just: it's fast and cheap
After watching a few minutes of this it makes me think that maybe we should be a little more interested in how smart it is.
My main wonder is the difference between it and having a small llm no thinking output a single number only as a choice. Isn't that nearly the same here?
For me in my day job, having extremely fast low quality decision makers over noisy inputs is very valuable. I work in security and having something that can help triage alerts, classify items and group things together is extremely valuable. It doesn't need to be perfect. Just being able to take a set of inputs from deterministic tooling and to be make general priority classifications goes a long way on helping humans look at the most important items first.
Why would you be confident in feeding garbage to a “cheap and fast” classifier with unknown domain-specific performance?
I know we kind assume omniscience for frontier models, but at this point the evidence is kind of out there.
Its very cool, but the harness is doing a _ton_ of heavy lifting.