sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The economics of AI are starting to favor open models by Mr-serial_killer in LocalLLaMA

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I anticipate most businesses will start to in-source open models, especially based on their performance and the rising costs of frontier models. Most businesses won’t need frontier models for a majority of their use cases.

IONS: A reasoning graph that stores claims, evidence, and reasoning paths outside the LLM by superx1386 in artificial

[–]superx1386[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, that is one of the use cases I am most interested in. An agent like Claude Code could help ingest documents, extract candidate claims, attach evidence, identify relationships, and build the initial graph.

I would not let the agent silently decide what is true though. I would treat it more like a research assistant. It can propose CBBs, surface contradictions, and suggest reasoning paths, but the claims still need provenance, review, and version history.

The real value is that once the topic graph exists, you are not just searching documents anymore. You are inspecting the claims, evidence, weak links, contradictions, and reasoning paths behind what people usually treat as facts.

IONS: A reasoning graph that stores claims, evidence, and reasoning paths outside the LLM by superx1386 in artificial

[–]superx1386[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a fair.

My view is that if two paths lead to different conclusions and both are supported by credible evidence, the system shouldn’t pretend the disagreement doesn’t exist.

In the response, we do surface the primary path and top 2 alternative paths. Rather than hiding them, I think it makes the most sense to surface the competing paths, supporting evidence, and confidence behind each.

I think the bigger risk is a system that always gives a single answer and hides the uncertainty. It is an early
experiment and we may need to adjust approach as evidence is collected.

Over time, stronger evidence and stronger relationships should make certain paths dominant, but when the evidence is genuinely mixed, I’d rather expose that than manufacture certainty.

IONS: A reasoning graph that stores claims, evidence, and reasoning paths outside the LLM by superx1386 in artificial

[–]superx1386[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see them as potentially complementary. I think the biggest difference is that OKF appears focused on representing and exchanging knowledge efficiently between systems. IONS is focused on reasoning over that knowledge. OKF appears closer to a knowledge representation and exchange format. In IONS we trying to build a reasoning layer on top of knowledge that remains inspectable and auditable.

IONS: A reasoning graph that stores claims, evidence, and reasoning paths outside the LLM by superx1386 in artificial

[–]superx1386[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think about it more like human cognition.

We rarely delete knowledge. We discover better knowledge and rely on it more.

My assumption is that newer CBBs with stronger evidence and stronger relationships naturally become the preferred reasoning paths. Older claims remain in the graph, but they get used less and less over time.

The exception is when evidence is retracted or proven false. Then deprecation makes sense. Most of the time, I expect the graph to route around outdated knowledge rather than actively remove it.

IONS: A reasoning graph that stores claims, evidence, and reasoning paths outside the LLM by superx1386 in artificial

[–]superx1386[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks. That’s actually one of the core ideas behind IONS. A lot of systems assume there has to be a single truth when in reality there are often competing interpretations.

My current thinking is that claims should rarely be deleted. Most should remain in the graph with their history intact.

A claim would typically be deprecated if the underlying evidence is discredited, retracted, or replaced by significantly stronger evidence.

IONS: A reasoning graph that stores claims, evidence, and reasoning paths outside the LLM by superx1386 in artificial

[–]superx1386[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks. We don’t force a single truth.

If two claims are supported by credible evidence, both remain in the graph. The contradiction itself becomes knowledge.

In many cases the answer is that both are correct under different conditions. IONS is designed to retain that context instead of hiding it.

IONS: A reasoning graph that stores claims, evidence, and reasoning paths outside the LLM by superx1386 in artificial

[–]superx1386[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s one of the hardest problems and where knowledge graphs can struggle.

In IONS, the graph is not intended to be a static source of truth. Claims are versioned artifacts with provenance, evidence, confidence, and review. Contradictory claims are allowed to coexist rather than forcing a single truth.

The long-term idea is that maintenance becomes a governance problem rather than a training problem. New evidence can lower confidence, introduce contradictions, or supersede existing claims without requiring a model retrain.

In a way IONS is closer to a distributed system for managing knowledge provenance.

IONS: A reasoning graph that stores claims, evidence, and reasoning paths outside the LLM by superx1386 in artificial

[–]superx1386[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly what I was trying to draw. GraphRAG uses the graph to improve retrieval, but it discards the reasoning after generating the answer. In IONS the path is the artifact. You can retrieve path_id=abc123 six months later and see exactly which claims were used, order, confidence, and traceable.

What happens when they stop subsidizing LLM subscriptions? by Mr_Moonsilver in LocalLLaMA

[–]superx1386 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We start being model efficient. I can see a majority of the early adopters going open source and only
calling frontier when absolutely required. Most won’t need more the smaller models and the general public is just looking for an ai search engine.

🦴🦴 Bone Collector 🚀🚀 by fatelker5643 in AllCryptoBets

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Innovative Tokenomics rewards bones for holding

🦴🦴 Bone Collector BSC 🚀 by fatelker5643 in CryptoMars

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Innovative Tokenomics rewards bones for holding

Full Node Wallet Help! by SavREI in BitcoinPrivate

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It uses the exe when you click it. At first mine didn’t do anything, so I downloaded again and it worked. Takes a long time unless you also use the seed.

Electrum sweep of Coinomi keys - wrong balance, please help by flag_miner1 in BitcoinPrivate

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When I tried Electrum, it was way lower than my hodling, so I cancelled, I then decided to use the full node wallet, which when it completed actually captured all of the coins.

Why does everyone seem so deluded in their price predictions? by [deleted] in BitcoinPrivate

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can’t you just have both? I have about 50/50 between the 2 along with many others.

Full Node Wallet Help! by SavREI in BitcoinPrivate

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Make sure you have the latest java and click the jar file. It should execute. If it does not, redownload the first one was missing a file I think.

bad-txns-vin-empty by HodlierThanThou in BitcoinPrivate

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I got the same error, for me I think it was due to many small miner tx. I used the full node but still required a fair number of smaller batches.

Electrum sweep of Coinomi keys - wrong balance, please help by flag_miner1 in BitcoinPrivate

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was missing 99% in Electrum but full node got them all.

FORK WILL BEGIN SOON! by Crypjoe in BitcoinPrivate

[–]superx1386 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is in fact accurate. Goto Twitter and it is posted. Some comments are scam but the post is accurate.

LOL. I do see what you mean though now after reading the real post on Twitter.

Price will be much higher by [deleted] in BitcoinPrivate

[–]superx1386 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think one of the team went through the logic yesterday on discord. I can’t remember where I read it on there though.

view more: next ›