3 ms·
>no there are tons of examples in the training set of verbatim copypastes from terminals. people post those on help forums and in documentation articles and so
by kilgnad 4y ago
>no there are tons of examples in the training set of verbatim copypastes from terminals. people post those on help forums and in documentation articles and so on. that's how it learned.
So a bunch of stackoverflow examples and it can derive how a terminal works an emulate a full filesystem? Most people aren't able to infer the concept without a real example computer to play with.
>it doesn't take many examples of seeing someone write `ls ~` and the next line being "Documents Downloads Pictures ..." to learn that pattern.
Did you see it create a bash script for making a jokes.txt THEN it was asked to run cat jokes.txt and outputted the CORRECT output. This isn't pattern matching. It's understanding what a filesystem and a shell is.
- _dain_ 4y agoit is pattern matching, the correct output is literally part of the prompt.
- kilgnad 4y agoKnowing which component of the prompt is required for the correct output indicates understanding. Especially when given the fact that the prompt as training data doesn't actually exist.
- _dain_ 4y agoI don't want to continue this argument forever but let me make my final thought: I can imagine a language model that can learn how the Linux terminal works but not how English works. I can NOT imagine a language model that can learn how English works but not how a Linux terminal works. English is strictly harder. So the fact that it knows English is already enough, the terminal parts are superfluous.
- kilgnad 4y agoThe more amazing part in that article I was referring to was the imitation of self in the terminal. farewell.