A huge step forward- to what? To building an uncontrollable firehose of bullshit? What, exactly, is that going "forward" towards? In any case, I'm no clairvoya

A huge step forward- to what? To building an uncontrollable firehose of bullshit? What, exactly, is that going "forward" towards? In any case, I'm no clairvoyant and I can't see the future. What I see right now is a huge mess and a gigantic marketing bubble. So I'll just sit tightly and wait to see what will happen in a few years. I do have to note though that, so far, all the large hype models that have come out of OpenAI's research -GPT-2, GPT-3, now ChatGPT- have not really been useful in anything but parlor tricks: generating silly poems and malfunctioning code, and the like. They're great entertainment, but not very useful all. As indeed have been earlier overhyped results. I wonder if anyone remembers the Neural Translation Machine in Google Translate and how it invented its own "interlingua"? >> It seems clear that, in light of the quote from Winograd, that simply isn't true. You're right, my comment exaggerates the achievement in SHRDLU. So let's say, not "absolute precision" but "unprecedented precision" and precision not since achieved again. Certainly not by any statistical language model. Or, I mean, I don't know. People have controlled robots with code created by GPT-3 etc (I've been in a couple of conferences where people from MIT were showing off some research to that point). Can you show me an example of an interaction like the one in Winograd's thesis? Personally, I haven't seen any so far. Edit: I'm re-reading my comments to make sure the tone is civil. Please let me know if you don't think it's OK.