Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Auto rigging without manual weight painting or skeleton construction. Creators/game devs are going to love this. SkinTokens converts skinning to discrete token sequences. uses Qwen3-0.6B for precise skeleton and weight gen across any 3D asset.

17,331 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

OpenAI chairman Bret Taylor talks to about 100 CEOs every month. His answer to the cheap open-weight model panic: cheaper to train does not mean cheaper to use, and the number that decides it is token efficiency. "One thing that I think is a little bit overblown about these open weight models is they're not necessarily cheaper to run. Whether or not they're cheaper to train, you don't care. Because you're using just as many tokens. In fact, they may be less efficient." "There's this thing called token efficiency. And it turns out the frontier models are much, much more token efficient." "A token is to intelligence like a watt is to electricity... how many tokens does it take to complete a task? Not every token is actually equal." "For a lot of tasks, it turns out these frontier models from OpenAI and Anthropic are actually just better than these open weight models... just having open weights isn't actually the main thing driving any of those costs." Later in the same interview he goes after the billing unit itself: "It would be like if you signed up for Gmail and you paid for CPU cycle or something... where the world is going is paying for outcomes." The unresolved column: the chart CNBC airs mid-answer, from Artificial Analysis, prices a completed task at $0.94 on Kimi K3 against $2.75 on Claude Fable 5, efficiency folded in. If that gap holds, the premium he is defending gets earned on quality, not price. - Bret Taylor (Bret Taylor), OpenAI chairman and Sierra co-founder, on CNBC's Squawk Box.

Karl Mehta

17,336 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Today, we’re sharing the first look at TollyLabs’ Uniswap v4 integration: infrastructure designed to bring every way to launch into one fully composable system on Arc. For too long, token launchpads have forced every project through the same rigid templates. Uniswap v4 hooks allow custom logic to operate throughout a market’s lifecycle, from initialization and swaps to liquidity changes and fee handling. For Tolly, that means launches can be designed around the asset, rather than forcing the asset to fit the launchpad. We’re building toward a spectrum of possibilities: • Plain tokens with a standard pad launch. • Creator-tax tokens with configurable buy and sell taxes, with proceeds directed to a wallet, burn, liquidity or another defined allocation. • Reflection tokens that automatically distribute USDC to holders pro rata, without manual claims or external keepers. • Programmable asset pairs that can trade against stablecoins, crypto assets and tokenized stocks, currencies and commodities. • Any combination of these mechanics. Most importantly, these are not isolated templates. They are composable building blocks. Our goal is a new kind of launchpad where creators can visually assemble sophisticated contracts and market structures without treating every launch as a custom engineering project. Simple when you need it. Fully programmable when you don’t. This is a preview of what we’ve been building. We’ll be explaining each component, and the system connecting them, over the coming days as we finish the work.

Tolly

67,804 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

learned a lot from this conversation with Simon Mo and Matt Bornstein. biggest takeaways for me: -there are a lot of reasons why we should like open-weight models. a lot of these arguments stop at handwavy things like "what if the labs stop releasing frontier models to the public" or "it's lower cost." but simon's position as lead maintainer of vLLM and CEO of Inferact give him authority to talk about some of the other, more interesting and concrete reasons to pay attention to open-weight models, namely that they allow end-users to calibrate latency / other performance metrics with way more customizability than what any of the frontier closed-source labs offer (and without the fear that your job might be met with a refusal at some random point where you're deep in a 2 hour job) -re: the above point...for this reason, a lot of US companies (inferact included!) choose to use open-weight models over their closed-source alternatives. this also isn't limited to internal workloads / research - on a recent a16z podcast the team at Decagon spoke about how something like 90% of their customer service ai agents run on open-weight models that they've fine-tuned. -we should really appreciate how many companies/teams came out researchers fascinated by the wave of very small open-weight models that were being distilled from e.g. gpt-3.5 and earlier models in 2022/2023 (prior to the release of chatGPT!). these small models motivated the development of pagedattention, which then led to vlmm/inferact (at other layers of the stack with similar origin stories, you can look at teams like openrouter or ollama). in other words, we have open-weight models to thank for a bunch of the orchestration infra we now rely on. i think yet another, indirect, way we can point to open-source/weight infra pushing the frontier forward. anyway, a lot more in this convo, it was a lot of fun!

Elena

12,922 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten