🍓 One of the coolest parts about being an early Strawberry user has been the opportunity to build on the app at the ground floor.
The platform already has a ton of great integrations that let you interact with your external apps directly with tools, but I wanted to add the ability to do stuff in Slack as well.
💪 So I took the base Anthropic Slack MCP server, added a whole bunch of new tools, and generalized it as an HTTP-based SSE-server and deployed it in like 2 minutes with Railway so that Strawberry could make use of it (as can Claude or any other MCP client).
Now, you can Chat with your Strawberry Companion (or Claude, or whatever) and do things like: ➡️ Get caught up across all of your Slack channels after a long weekend or noisy incident without having to read 20 threads in 10 different channels ➡️ Create, read, and edit Canvases, Messages, and Channels ➡️ Take any resources or content that you're using in your Chat and inject it directly into Slack without copy / paste
😎 I'm pretty pleased with the results, and I made a short demo video showing the results of the work (link in comments). The best part is, it's available on GitHub for anyone else to use too (link in the comments, instructions in the README). The setup takes about 5-10 minutes.
Introducing StereoSpace -- our new end-to-end method for turning photos into stereo images without explicit geometry or depth maps. This makes it especially robust with thin structures and transparencies. Try the demo below:
💭 Do thinking traces make Language Models learn better? Curious what others think
𝗦𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼 You take an instruction-following LM. You want to train it with a GRPO-style RL algorithm on a task like Tic Tac Toe. Rewards are outcome-based, applied only at the end of each episode: win/loss/draw, format adherence...
During training, the model could just output answers, but a common choice is to make it also output thinking traces.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 Does forcing the model to produce thinking traces during training actually improve learning❓
💬 I'd like to hear your thoughts. Share ideas and links to relevant papers and resources.
From what I've understood so far, the answer seems to be 𝘆𝗲𝘀.
1️⃣ If you force the model to think during training, it becomes a model that thinks at inference time. It naturally allocates more budget (tokens) to a problem, which tends to improve performance.
2️⃣ While the model's "reasoning" already exists in its activation space, using explicit thinking traces as a scratchpad allows training to steer and shape that reasoning.
3️⃣ As the model produces more traces during training, the RL algorithm can progressively give higher rewards to the reasoning patterns that lead to better outcomes.
Introducing 🇨🇭WindowSeat🇨🇭 –– our new method for removing reflections from photos taken through windows, on planes, in malls, offices, and other glass-filled environments.
Finetuning a foundation diffusion transformer for reflection removal quickly runs up against the limits of what existing datasets and techniques can offer. To fill that gap, we generate physically accurate examples in Blender that simulate realistic glass and reflection effects. This data enables strong performance on both established benchmarks and previously unseen images.
To make this practical, the open-source Apache-2 model builds on Qwen-Image-Edit-2509, a 20B image-editing diffusion transformer that runs on a single GPU and can be fine-tuned in about a day. WindowSeat keeps its use of the underlying DiT cleanly separated from the data and training recipe, allowing future advances in base models to be incorporated with minimal friction.
What a trip. Just walked through @burtenshaw and @evalstate tutorial on adding Hugging Face Skills to your Claude Code agent so you can fine tune LLMs by chatting with AI.
These are the kinds of innovations that are going to help everyone benefit from the power of Artificial Intelligence. Well done gentlemen and thank you for sharing.
😐 I keep seeing takes on LinkedIn from American business influencers melting down about Silicon Valley startup "dependence" on open-source Chinese models.
🤔 Can anyone describe a credible scenario where these models can be leveraged by the Chinese government to endanger American security interests or am I right to believe that this is just Red Scare nonsense?