Top
Best
New

Posted by aloukissas 10 hours ago

Amazon saves millions by replacing Sonnet 4.6 with Strands Decider(strandsagents.com)
540 points | 194 commentspage 3
llukas 8 hours ago|
Are developments like that priced in Anthropic IPO?
nikit1411 8 hours ago||
yah i mean older models dosent mean they are worthless i still use cluade opus 4.6 for day to day task
Rapzid 4 hours ago||
Slop article. First paragraph is 100% AI! Fucking lazy ass slop drivel.
simianwords 7 hours ago||
why didn't they use Jev or Luna decision model? Seems odd that they used Sonnet and Strands instead of trying out of the box solutions
Kyo91 1 hour ago||
Strands Agents is an AWS product. They're dogfooding their own product in typical AWS fashion.
win311fwg 5 hours ago||
Because when Sonnet was originally chosen, Jev/Luna weren't available to choose from? The decision model movement hadn't happened yet. When they were ready to replace Sonnet, they already had their own decision model. Why use someone else's?
phillennium 9 hours ago||
It's funny how AI sometimes feels like it went full circle:

— "Let's build efficient classifiers"

— "Forget about the silly classifiers, LET'S BUILD A MACHINE GOD"

— "Ah, that machine god is often too expensive and underwhelming. Let's build efficient classifiers"

Schiendelman 8 hours ago||
The key is that the circle takes a few weeks instead of a decade.
written-beyond 8 hours ago||
You'll be surprised how fast things move when there's European GDP levels of investment going into an industry.
oblio 6 hours ago||
You should probably say "European country GDP levels of investment" as the European economy as whole is +/- the size of the US economy.
solidasparagus 7 hours ago|||
If you were actually involved in that work pre-LLM, you know it didn't go in a circle. Most projects died at training data and problem definition. That isn't the case with LLM applications which can ship with zero data collection and labelling effort.

Now you can iterate on your 20 ticket categories in days against real workloads and not commit to training an efficient model until you've proven the prototype in production.

dejj 5 hours ago||
"Let them eat cake"-and-find-out-phase is what I'd like to call step 2.
tveita 7 hours ago||
> One thing that surprised us was that JSON key order changed the answer. Sending the same content with keys in a different order moved the output probabilities by up to 0.19.

That's like... really basic LLM knowledge? Like how e.g. this article measures how often answers change based on order https://zachlandes.com/trolley-problem/#appendix-a:~:text=Ch...

Or is this the Claudish "One thing that suprised us" that just means "and here's another thing"?

creativeSlumber 5 hours ago|
I did not know that json order can change the answer. Doesn't that make LLM's unreliable? Do we know why this happens?
xolox 4 hours ago||
I think this is similar to how small changes in phrasing can completely change the answer you get from an LLM. This all goes to confirm that LLMs are, at their core, still text completion engines, they (frequently / always?) don't have a firm semantic grip on the topic at hand.

Here's an interesting reference on this that gives a bit more background information:

-- 8< --

Because LLMs (and many other ML systems) are chaotic, it is possible to manipulate them into doing something unexpected through a small, apparently innocuous change to their input. These changes can be illegible to human observers, which makes them harder to detect and prevent.

For example, flipping a single pixel in an image can make computer vision systems misclassify images. You can replace words with synonyms to make LLMs give the wrong answer, or introduce misspellings or homoglyphs. You can provide strings that are tokenized differently, causing the LLM to do something malicious. You can publish poisoned web pages and wait for an LLM maker to use them for training. Or sneak invisible Unicode characters into open-source repositories or social media profiles.

-- >8 --

Source: https://aphyr.com/posts/412-the-future-of-everything-is-lies...

pietz 3 hours ago||
Wait, are you telling me that if you replace an oversized and outdated model, with a small one that fits the use case and reduce your input by 70%, you end up saving money?!??
polynomial 2 hours ago|
Yes, you save $20,000.
speedboat199 8 hours ago||
Meanwhile they could have just switched to Haiku 5.5 to get same savings. No need for complex orchestration involving GPU instances and would have just been a one line change in the code.
HarHarVeryFunny 1 hour ago|
The Strands solution is based on an open weights model, so has zero API cost, and Amazon are obviously well positioned to serve it themselves extremely inexpensively.

A modern model like Haiku 5.5 is still going to be overkill for many of these decision model use cases, and is probably at least 10x the number of parameters (Haiku 20-50B ??? vs Strand Decsions 2B Gemma 4).

ZiiS 6 hours ago||
Amazon saves millions by asking their pencil manufacture to make them 1mm shorter. At that scale anything adds up to millions.
coolgoose 9 hours ago|
Yea right... Paying market price of 3 usd per mil tokens on sonnet 4.6...
More comments...