6 ms·
> you're talking to a computer in English ffs and it not only understands you, it goes away and does useful work. Google has “understood” English queries for a
by awb 4y ago
> you're talking to a computer in English ffs and it not only understands you, it goes away and does useful work.
Google has “understood” English queries for a while now in the sense that you can type a question in English into the search bar and it goes off and does “useful work”.
The problem with these AI implementations is that it goes off and does work, but not always useful work. In many cases it’s wrong. In many cases the result is below entry-level.
In those times where it can pass a structured test like a bar exam, then absolutely praise it and get curious about how it can add value to people’s lives.
But in this instance, it couldn’t pass a CS 101 or Design 101 class. It’s on its way, but these claims of being able to use AI to create websites are premature.
At this pace we might be there in a few years or even months, but right now the quality is lacking from any demo I’ve seen and in my own attempts as a designer to use it in the design process.
- ux-app 4y agoyou've got to be joking mate. >Google has “understood” English queries you can't, with a straight face, be comparing a Google search to what ChatGPT is doing. C'mon man. >In many cases it’s wrong. In many cases the result is below entry-level. Once again I'm baffled by this dismissal. I don't think you actually understand what you're seeing with ChatGPT. There is very interesting emergent behaviour occurring. Trying to explain the behaviour is literally cutting edge research. >but right now the quality is lacking the technology was literal science fiction 3 years ago, what it can do is astonishing. If you're not jaw on the floor astonished then you simply don't understand what kind of a leap this represents.
- thedorkknight 4y agoThis technology was not literally science fiction three years ago. The initial gpt3 beta was released in June 2020.
- ux-app 4y agowhat's your point?
- apsurd 4y agocurious what the emergent behavior is. it's a massive hash lookup table at a scale never accomplished and then you can lookup recursively and such. then follows whether humans/consciousness is not also just a hash lookup. humans have emergent property of consciousness, so philosophy aside, what's currently emerginent in chatgpt?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- shock-value 4y agoThe advancement with these LLMs lies in the fact that they can effectively learn to recognize patterns within “large-ish” input text sequences and probabilistically generate a likely next word given those patterns. It’s a genuine advancement. However it is still just pattern matching. And describing anything it’s doing as “behavior” is a real stretch given that it is a feed-forward network that does not incorporate any notion of agency, memory, or deliberation into its processing.
- ux-app 4y ago>However it is still just pattern matching the visual cortex in your brain is also "just a pattern matching" system. guess it's not very impressive by your standard. This[1] isn't my example (it's from another HN user), but if you work as a programmer and you're not absolutely jaw on the floor astonished by this example then I don't know what to say. Explaining[2] the emergent behaviour is literally cutting edge research. Hand waving this behaviour away as just "probabilistically generating a likely next word" is ignorant. It's amazing in similar ways to Conway's Game of Life. [1] https://imgur.com/HOEnxYb https://imgur.com/HOEnxYb [2]https://ai.googleblog.com/2022/11/characterizing-emergent-phenomena-in.html https://ai.googleblog.com/2022/11/characterizing-emergent-ph...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- shock-value 4y agoI'm arguing against the notion that these LLMs exhibit "emergent behaviour" as you stated. I don't believe they do, as the term is commonly understood. Emergent behavior usually implies the exhibition of some kind of complexity from a fundamentally simple system. But these LLMs are not fundamentally simple, when considered together with the vast corpus of training data to which they are inextricably linked. The emergent behavior of Conway's Game of Life arises purely out of the simple rules upon which the simulation proceeds -- a fundamental difference.
- ux-app 4y ago
- arroz 4y agoGoogle has understood English queries for years. Lately it has even been highlighting the answers you are looking for in the websites it shows. chatGPT is diferente but not far off.
- Nevermark 4y agoGoogle doesn't do open ended reasoning. It can't refine the tasks you give it based on a long conversation. It can't take elaborate what-if scenarios and role play. Reasoning about multiple actors in interesting situations is light years ahead of Google. Google can't write code, or translate code to a human language explanation of an algorithm. There is more than a couple orders of magnitude difference in what is happening!
- panosfilianos 4y agoNeither does ChatGPT. It just appears that it does to a machine (human brain) that can do it and assess if others do it too.
- resonious 4y agoGoogle has always had a hard time understanding simple constructs like "not" and "from" and "to". ChatGPT seems to actually get what I'm saying most of the time.
- awb 4y ago> you can't, with a straight face, be comparing a Google search to what ChatGPT is doing. C'mon man. I’m comparing the utility of the output > Trying to explain the behaviour is literally cutting edge research. Here’s a good summary: What Is ChatGPT Doing … and Why Does It Work? It’s Just Adding One Word at a Time https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2023/02/what-is-chatgpt-doing-and-why-does-it-work/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2023/02/what-is-chatgpt-... > If you're not jaw on the floor astonished then you simply don't understand what kind of a leap this represents. It’s conversational abilities are truly impressive. But it’s ability to create websites is lacking, which is what this article is about.