4 ms·

And precisely none of what you just said addresses my point.

• LoSboccacc 6y ago
  > The point is that we are getting unintuitive and unexpected results. > it will find unexpected correlations between data but there's zero indication whether these correlation bear any significance until a human goes validate the prompt, and it can generate infinite of these, making the discovery of significant new ideas pretty slim seems a pretty direct response tbh
  • Bx6667 6y ago
    No, you are missing the point completely
    • LoSboccacc 6y ago
      it isn't really helpful or conductive of an interesting discussion that you are not detailing what the point is, even when the "the point is this" gets directly quoted, while not clarifying neither the point nor why the reply don't apply.
      • Bx6667 6y ago
        These results are literally unexpected. The consensus of all the experts in 2010 was that none of this could possibly happen in the next ten years. The way these results were arrived at are unintuitive which probably has to do with why they were so utterly unexpected. The broad effort to mine “algorithm space,” which includes many different ML agents and other things, is producing results that were not expected. This is just a fact. There is no way around this. Just accept it and move on. It’s obvious that the surprises will keep coming. We slowly close in on the algorithms that bring the silicon to its full potential. The real question is what is at the bottom? We keep digging and with more compute and more data eventually we will find that the stuff near the bottom is important and dangerous. The fact that gtp3 has x flaw has absolutely no logical intersection with this. It’s basically unrelated.