Found the atruvia employee ;D

I am in banking and it's fine we have some finetuned models to work with our code base. I think COBOL is a good language for LLM use. It's verbose and English like syntax aligns naturally with the way language models process text. Can't complain.

Can you elaborate? See questions about what kind of use in sibling thread.

And in addition to the type of development you are doing in COBOL, I'm wondering if you also have used LLMs to port existing code to (say) Java, C# or whatever is current in (presumably) banking?

What these models are doing - migrations, new feature releases, etc? What does your setup look like?

This is implied but I guess needs to be made explicit: people are looking for answers from devs with direct knowledge of the question at hand, not what random devs suspect.

It's the russia in the 90s timeline. "I don't care about politics." if it's not aligned with the politics I like.

What's there to discuss about this? Who will it convince that the 1000 other things Trump has said and done hasn't?

This isn't even more outrageous than other things Trump has said. It would be if he actually invades, but he won't...

More like the American timeline i.e. "that's the other party I don't like." There is this continual suspicion that if you criticise one lot you must support the other, as if there are only two shows in town.

I just let Claude built little native apps instead...

You can just wait and verify instead of the publishing, redacting cycles of the last year. It's embarrassing.

I think it shows problems with your tests tbh. The bigger models are way more capable than you make them out to be. They are also better in training and understanding of CGI render outputs as reference like normal maps or id-masks. Your testing suite is the perfect example that structured data implies false confidence. Pure t2i is not a good benchmark anymore.

Thanks for the feedback.

> The bigger models are way more capable than you make them out to be.

No test suite is ever going to be perfect. GenAI Showdown was started with the goal of focusing on a very narrow spectrum of testing (prompt adherence) because as a creator that's the one of the most interest to me.

> Pure t2i is not a good benchmark anymore

Just FYI Image Editing is already a separate benchmark (see the navbar at the top).

> Your testing suite is the perfect example that structured data implies false confidence

Again - the headline is "Specific prompts and challenges with a strong emphasis placed on adherence". If I tried to capture every possible aspect of GenAI models (multimodal, texture maps, periodic motion, tiling, etc) - I'd be at it until the heat death of the universe.

Incidentally - which model (specifically) do you think is ranked unfairly? While Flux.2 [dev] did only score a single point above ZiT, it's weighted score is much higher (1442 points vs 911 points).

It's important for finetuning, Lora training and as a refiner...

I also heard so, that it would mainly be useful for training and applying the resulting Lora to the distilled Turbo model.

However, I wonder what has been the source of the delay with its release and if there were problems with that approach.

I listened to it like 12 years through proxies and always hoped they would expand worldwide, they got more aggressive with their blocking so I ditched them. I really miss their radio stations.

Before SP1 it was unusable.

> Before SP1 it was unusable.

This was the "Release name" for every NT version. RCs were alpha quality, SP1 was the first beta, with SP2 things started to be ok. This was true until 7, then the Gates of hell opened and Windows is now an eternal "release" ( the thing between RC and SP1).

With all the onboarding and pivots I bet meta collectively hold back genai innovation by at least a year.