5 ms·

> We are literally arguing semantics if this is AGI, And if it isn't? Literally every single argument I've seen towards this being AGI is "We don't know at all

> We are literally arguing semantics if this is AGI, And if it isn't? Literally every single argument I've seen towards this being AGI is "We don't know at all how intelligence works, so let's say that this is it!!!!!" > nowhere near the game changer ChatGPT(4) is, even if ChatGPT was only available for the subset of scientists that benefit from Alpha Fold This is utter nonsense. For anyone who actually knows a field, ChatGPT generates unhelpful, plausible-looking nonsense. Conferences are putting up ChatGPT answers about their fields to laugh at because of how misleadingly wrong they are. This is absolutely okay, because it can be a useful tool without being the singularity. I'd sure that in a couple of years time, most of what ChatGPT achieves will be in line with most of the tech industry advances in the past decade - pushing the bottom out of the labor market and actively making the lives of the poorest worse in order to line their own pockets. I really wish people would stop projecting hopes and wishes on top of breathless marketing.

BlackSwanMan 4y ago
GPT4 can pass the the neurosurgical medical boards, most of the people laughing at it are typically too dumb to note the difference between 3.5 and 4. >pushing the bottom out of the labor market and actively making the lives of the poorest worse in order to line their own pockets. This makes zero sense. GPT4 has little effect on a janitor or truck driver. It doesn't pick fruit, or wash cars.
- pclmulqdq 4y ago
  FWIW, as a non-pathologist with a pathologist for a father, I can almost pass the pathology boards when taken as a test in isolation. Most of these tests are very easy for professionals in their fields, and are just a Jacksonian barrier to entry. Being allowed to sit for the test is the hard part, not the test itself. As far as I know, the exception to this is the bar exam, which GPT-4 can also pass, but that exam plays into GPT-4's strengths much more than other professional exams.
  - Quarrel 4y ago
    > the exception to this is the bar exam FWIW, this is more true for CA than most states.
  - defen 4y ago
    What is a Jacksonian barrier to entry? I can't find the phrase "Jacksonian barrier" anywhere else on the internet except in one journal article that talks about barriers against women's participation in the public sphere in Columbia County NY during Andrew Jackson's presidency.
    - pclmulqdq 4y ago
      I may have gotten the president wrong (I was 95% sure it's named after Jackson until I Googled it), but the word "Jacksonian" was meant to refer to the addition of bureaucracy to a process to make it cost more to do it, and thus discourage people. I guess I should have said "red tape" instead... Either it's a really obscure usage of the word or I got the president wrong.
      - CamperBob2 4y ago
        "It's difficult to attribute the addition of bureaucracy or increased costs to a specific U.S. president, as many presidents have overseen the growth of the federal government and its bureaucracy throughout American history. However, it is worth mentioning that Lyndon B. Johnson's administration, during the 1960s, saw a significant expansion of the federal government and the creation of many new agencies and programs as part of his "Great Society" initiative. This expansion led to increased bureaucracy, which some argue made certain processes more expensive and inefficient. But it's important to note that the intentions of these initiatives were to address issues such as poverty, education, and civil rights, rather than to intentionally make processes more costly or discourage people. Signed, Guess Who"
        pclmulqdq 4y ago
        Yeah, I asked ChatGPT about it too, and unsurprisingly (and unhelpfully) got answers that pointed to every president.
- quickthrower2 4y ago
  Exams are designed to be challenging to humans because most of us don’t have photographic memories or RAM based memory, so passing the test is a good predictor of knowing your stuff, i.e. deep comprehension. Making GPT sit it is like getting someone with no knowledge but a computer full of past questions and answers and a search button to sit the exam. It has metaphorical written it’s answers on it’s arm.
  - entropicdrifter 4y ago
    This is essentially true. I explained it to my friends like this: It knows a lot of stuff, but it can't do much thinking, so the minute your problem and its solution are far enough off the well-trodden path, its logic falls apart. Likewise, it's not especially good at math. It's great at understanding your question and replying with a good plain-english answer, but it's not actually thinking
    - zamnos 4y ago
      That's a disservice to your friends, unless you spend a bunch of time defining thinking first, and even then, it's not clear that it, with what it knows and the computing power it has access to, doesn't "think". It totally does a bunch of problem solving; fails on some, succeeds on others (just like a human that thinks); GPT-4's better than GPT-3. It's quite successful at simple reasoning (eg https://sharegpt.com/c/SCeRkT7 https://sharegpt.com/c/SCeRkT7 and moderately successful at difficult reasoning (eg getting a solution to the puzzle question about the man, the fox, the chicken, and the grain trying to cross the river. GPT-3 fails if you substitute in different animals, but GPT-4 seems to be able to handle that. GPT-4's passed the bar exam, which has a whole section on logic puzzles (sample test questions from '07: https://www.trainertestprep.com/lsat/blog/sample-lsat-logic-games https://www.trainertestprep.com/lsat/blog/sample-lsat-logic-... ). It's able to define new concepts and new words. It's masters have gone to great lengths to prevent it from writing out particular types of judgements (eg https://sharegpt.com/c/uPztFv1 https://sharegpt.com/c/uPztFv1). Hell, it's got a great imagination if you look at all the hallucinations it produces. All of that sum up to many thinking-adjacent things, if not actual thinking! It all really hinges on your definition of thinking.
r3trohack3r 4y ago
Your experience and my experience do not align. I asked GPT-4 to give me a POSIX compliant C port of dirbuster. It spit one out with instructions for compiling it. I asked it to make it more aggressive at scanning and it updated it to be multi-threaded. I asked it for a word list, and it gave me the git command to clone one from GitHub and the command to compile the program and run the output with the word list. I then told it that the HTTP service I was scanning always returned 200 status=ok instead of a 404 and asked it for a patch file. It generated that and gave me the instructions for applying it to the program. There was a bug I had to fix: word lists aren’t prefixed with /. Other than that one character fix, GPT-4 wrote a C program that used an open source word list to scan the HTTP service running on the television in my living room for routes, and found the /pong route. This week it’s written 100% of the API code that takes a CRUD based REST API and maps it to and from SQL queries for me on a cloudflare worker. I give it the method signature and the problem statement, it gives me the code, and I copy and paste. If you’re laughing this thing off as generating unhelpful nonsense you’re going to get blind sided in the next few years as GPT gets wired into the workflows at every layer of your stack. > pushing the bottom out of the labor market and actively making the lives of the poorest worse in order to line their own pockets. I’m in a BNI group and a majority of these blue collar workers have very little to worry about with GPT right now. Until Boston Dynamics gets its stuff together and the robots can do drywalling and plumbing, I’m not sure I agree with your take. This isn’t coming for the “poorest” among us. This is coming for the middle class. From brand consultants and accountants to software engineers and advertisers. Software engineers with GPT are about to replace software engineers without GPT. Accountants with GPT are about to replace accountants without GPT. > Literally every single argument I've seen towards this being AGI is Here is one: it can simultaneously pass the bar exam, port dirbuster to POSIX compliant C, give me a list of competing brands for conducting a market analysis, get into deep philosophical debates, and help me file my taxes. It can do all of this simultaneously. I can't find a human capable of the simultaneous breadth and depth of intelligence that ChatGPT exhibits. You can find someone in the upper 90th percentile of any profession and show that they can out compete GPT4. But you can't take that same person and ask them to out compete someone in the bottom 50th percentile of 4 other fields with much success. Artificial = machine, check. Intelligence = exhibits Nth percentile intelligence in a single field, check General = exhibits Nth percentile intelligence in more than one field, check This is AGI, now we are nit-picking. It's here.
nicetryguy 4y ago
> ChatGPT generates unhelpful, plausible-looking nonsense. Absolutely not! I created a powershell script for converting one ASM label format to another for retro game development and i used ChatGPT to write it. Now, it fumbled some of the basic program logic, however, it absolutely nailed all of the specific regex and obtuse powershell commands that i needed and that i merely described to it in plain English. It essentially aced the "hard parts" of the script and i was able to take what it generated and make it fit my needs perfectly with some minor tweaking. The end result was far cleaner and far beyond what i would have been able to write myself, all in a fraction of the time. This ain't no breathless marketing dude: this thing is the real deal. ChatGPT is an extremely powerful tool and an absolute game changer for development. Just because it is imperfect and needs a bit of hand holding (which it may not soon), do not underestimate it, and do not discount the idea that it may become an absolute industry disrupter in the painfully near future. I'm excited ...and scared
- robotresearcher 4y ago
  >> ChatGPT generates unhelpful, plausible-looking nonsense. > Absolutely not! It does, quite often. Not only that, as you describe. But it does. For example, I asked it what my most cited paper is, and it made up a plausible-sounding but non-existent paper, along with fabricated Google Scholar citation counts. Totally unhelpful. It also can produce very useful things.
  - actionfromafar 4y ago
    I find it’s better at really mainstream things. The web is riddled with Powershell examples.
  - nicetryguy 4y ago
    Right, i think it's a question of how to use this tool in its current state, including prompting practice and learning its strengths. It can certainly be wrong sometimes, but man, it is already a game changer for writing, coding, and i'm sure other disciplines. If you're a robotresearcher, maybe try getting it to whip up some ...verilog circuits or something? I don't know much about your field or what you do specifically, but tasks like regular expressions or specific code syntax it is absolutely brilliant at, whatever the equivalent to that is in hardware. ...I've only ever replaced capacitors and wired some guitar pickups. > it made up a plausible-sounding but non-existent paper, along with fabricated Google Scholar citation counts I ran into a similar issue: I asked it for codebases of similar romhacks to a project i'm doing, and it provided made up Github repos with completely unrelated authors for romhacks that do actually exist: non-existent hyperlinks and everything. Now, studying the difference in GPT generations, it seems like more horsepower and more data solves alot of GPT problems and produces emergent capabilities with the same or similar architecture and code. The current data points to this trend continuing. I find it both super exciting and super ...concerning.
astrange 4y ago
> I'd sure that in a couple of years time, most of what ChatGPT achieves will be in line with most of the tech industry advances in the past decade - pushing the bottom out of the labor market and actively making the lives of the poorest worse in order to line their own pockets This is not what any of the US economic stats have looked like in the last decade. Especially since 2019, the poorest Americans are the only people whose incomes have gone up!
rockinghigh 4y ago
> ChatGPT generates unhelpful, plausible-looking nonsense. I use ChatGPT daily to generate code in multiple languages. Not only does it generate complex code, but it can explain it and improve it when prompted to do so. It's mind blowing.
pmoriarty 4y ago
I'd recommend reading the Sparks of AGI paper[1] and watching the accompanying video[2] [1] - https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 [2] - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c

BlackSwanMan 4y ago

GPT4 can pass the the neurosurgical medical boards, most of the people laughing at it are typically too dumb to note the difference between 3.5 and 4. >pushing the bottom out of the labor market and actively making the lives of the poorest worse in order to line their own pockets. This makes zero sense. GPT4 has little effect on a janitor or truck driver. It doesn't pick fruit, or wash cars.

pclmulqdq 4y ago
FWIW, as a non-pathologist with a pathologist for a father, I can almost pass the pathology boards when taken as a test in isolation. Most of these tests are very easy for professionals in their fields, and are just a Jacksonian barrier to entry. Being allowed to sit for the test is the hard part, not the test itself. As far as I know, the exception to this is the bar exam, which GPT-4 can also pass, but that exam plays into GPT-4's strengths much more than other professional exams.
- Quarrel 4y ago
  > the exception to this is the bar exam FWIW, this is more true for CA than most states.
- defen 4y ago
  What is a Jacksonian barrier to entry? I can't find the phrase "Jacksonian barrier" anywhere else on the internet except in one journal article that talks about barriers against women's participation in the public sphere in Columbia County NY during Andrew Jackson's presidency.
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    I may have gotten the president wrong (I was 95% sure it's named after Jackson until I Googled it), but the word "Jacksonian" was meant to refer to the addition of bureaucracy to a process to make it cost more to do it, and thus discourage people. I guess I should have said "red tape" instead... Either it's a really obscure usage of the word or I got the president wrong.
    - CamperBob2 4y ago
      "It's difficult to attribute the addition of bureaucracy or increased costs to a specific U.S. president, as many presidents have overseen the growth of the federal government and its bureaucracy throughout American history. However, it is worth mentioning that Lyndon B. Johnson's administration, during the 1960s, saw a significant expansion of the federal government and the creation of many new agencies and programs as part of his "Great Society" initiative. This expansion led to increased bureaucracy, which some argue made certain processes more expensive and inefficient. But it's important to note that the intentions of these initiatives were to address issues such as poverty, education, and civil rights, rather than to intentionally make processes more costly or discourage people. Signed, Guess Who"
      - pclmulqdq 4y ago
        Yeah, I asked ChatGPT about it too, and unsurprisingly (and unhelpfully) got answers that pointed to every president.
quickthrower2 4y ago
Exams are designed to be challenging to humans because most of us don’t have photographic memories or RAM based memory, so passing the test is a good predictor of knowing your stuff, i.e. deep comprehension. Making GPT sit it is like getting someone with no knowledge but a computer full of past questions and answers and a search button to sit the exam. It has metaphorical written it’s answers on it’s arm.
- entropicdrifter 4y ago
  This is essentially true. I explained it to my friends like this: It knows a lot of stuff, but it can't do much thinking, so the minute your problem and its solution are far enough off the well-trodden path, its logic falls apart. Likewise, it's not especially good at math. It's great at understanding your question and replying with a good plain-english answer, but it's not actually thinking
  - zamnos 4y ago
    That's a disservice to your friends, unless you spend a bunch of time defining thinking first, and even then, it's not clear that it, with what it knows and the computing power it has access to, doesn't "think". It totally does a bunch of problem solving; fails on some, succeeds on others (just like a human that thinks); GPT-4's better than GPT-3. It's quite successful at simple reasoning (eg https://sharegpt.com/c/SCeRkT7 https://sharegpt.com/c/SCeRkT7 and moderately successful at difficult reasoning (eg getting a solution to the puzzle question about the man, the fox, the chicken, and the grain trying to cross the river. GPT-3 fails if you substitute in different animals, but GPT-4 seems to be able to handle that. GPT-4's passed the bar exam, which has a whole section on logic puzzles (sample test questions from '07: https://www.trainertestprep.com/lsat/blog/sample-lsat-logic-games https://www.trainertestprep.com/lsat/blog/sample-lsat-logic-... ). It's able to define new concepts and new words. It's masters have gone to great lengths to prevent it from writing out particular types of judgements (eg https://sharegpt.com/c/uPztFv1 https://sharegpt.com/c/uPztFv1). Hell, it's got a great imagination if you look at all the hallucinations it produces. All of that sum up to many thinking-adjacent things, if not actual thinking! It all really hinges on your definition of thinking.

r3trohack3r 4y ago

Your experience and my experience do not align. I asked GPT-4 to give me a POSIX compliant C port of dirbuster. It spit one out with instructions for compiling it. I asked it to make it more aggressive at scanning and it updated it to be multi-threaded. I asked it for a word list, and it gave me the git command to clone one from GitHub and the command to compile the program and run the output with the word list. I then told it that the HTTP service I was scanning always returned 200 status=ok instead of a 404 and asked it for a patch file. It generated that and gave me the instructions for applying it to the program. There was a bug I had to fix: word lists aren’t prefixed with /. Other than that one character fix, GPT-4 wrote a C program that used an open source word list to scan the HTTP service running on the television in my living room for routes, and found the /pong route. This week it’s written 100% of the API code that takes a CRUD based REST API and maps it to and from SQL queries for me on a cloudflare worker. I give it the method signature and the problem statement, it gives me the code, and I copy and paste. If you’re laughing this thing off as generating unhelpful nonsense you’re going to get blind sided in the next few years as GPT gets wired into the workflows at every layer of your stack. > pushing the bottom out of the labor market and actively making the lives of the poorest worse in order to line their own pockets. I’m in a BNI group and a majority of these blue collar workers have very little to worry about with GPT right now. Until Boston Dynamics gets its stuff together and the robots can do drywalling and plumbing, I’m not sure I agree with your take. This isn’t coming for the “poorest” among us. This is coming for the middle class. From brand consultants and accountants to software engineers and advertisers. Software engineers with GPT are about to replace software engineers without GPT. Accountants with GPT are about to replace accountants without GPT. > Literally every single argument I've seen towards this being AGI is Here is one: it can simultaneously pass the bar exam, port dirbuster to POSIX compliant C, give me a list of competing brands for conducting a market analysis, get into deep philosophical debates, and help me file my taxes. It can do all of this simultaneously. I can't find a human capable of the simultaneous breadth and depth of intelligence that ChatGPT exhibits. You can find someone in the upper 90th percentile of any profession and show that they can out compete GPT4. But you can't take that same person and ask them to out compete someone in the bottom 50th percentile of 4 other fields with much success. Artificial = machine, check. Intelligence = exhibits Nth percentile intelligence in a single field, check General = exhibits Nth percentile intelligence in more than one field, check This is AGI, now we are nit-picking. It's here.

nicetryguy 4y ago

> ChatGPT generates unhelpful, plausible-looking nonsense. Absolutely not! I created a powershell script for converting one ASM label format to another for retro game development and i used ChatGPT to write it. Now, it fumbled some of the basic program logic, however, it absolutely nailed all of the specific regex and obtuse powershell commands that i needed and that i merely described to it in plain English. It essentially aced the "hard parts" of the script and i was able to take what it generated and make it fit my needs perfectly with some minor tweaking. The end result was far cleaner and far beyond what i would have been able to write myself, all in a fraction of the time. This ain't no breathless marketing dude: this thing is the real deal. ChatGPT is an extremely powerful tool and an absolute game changer for development. Just because it is imperfect and needs a bit of hand holding (which it may not soon), do not underestimate it, and do not discount the idea that it may become an absolute industry disrupter in the painfully near future. I'm excited ...and scared

robotresearcher 4y ago
>> ChatGPT generates unhelpful, plausible-looking nonsense. > Absolutely not! It does, quite often. Not only that, as you describe. But it does. For example, I asked it what my most cited paper is, and it made up a plausible-sounding but non-existent paper, along with fabricated Google Scholar citation counts. Totally unhelpful. It also can produce very useful things.
- actionfromafar 4y ago
  I find it’s better at really mainstream things. The web is riddled with Powershell examples.
- nicetryguy 4y ago
  Right, i think it's a question of how to use this tool in its current state, including prompting practice and learning its strengths. It can certainly be wrong sometimes, but man, it is already a game changer for writing, coding, and i'm sure other disciplines. If you're a robotresearcher, maybe try getting it to whip up some ...verilog circuits or something? I don't know much about your field or what you do specifically, but tasks like regular expressions or specific code syntax it is absolutely brilliant at, whatever the equivalent to that is in hardware. ...I've only ever replaced capacitors and wired some guitar pickups. > it made up a plausible-sounding but non-existent paper, along with fabricated Google Scholar citation counts I ran into a similar issue: I asked it for codebases of similar romhacks to a project i'm doing, and it provided made up Github repos with completely unrelated authors for romhacks that do actually exist: non-existent hyperlinks and everything. Now, studying the difference in GPT generations, it seems like more horsepower and more data solves alot of GPT problems and produces emergent capabilities with the same or similar architecture and code. The current data points to this trend continuing. I find it both super exciting and super ...concerning.

astrange 4y ago

> I'd sure that in a couple of years time, most of what ChatGPT achieves will be in line with most of the tech industry advances in the past decade - pushing the bottom out of the labor market and actively making the lives of the poorest worse in order to line their own pockets This is not what any of the US economic stats have looked like in the last decade. Especially since 2019, the poorest Americans are the only people whose incomes have gone up!

rockinghigh 4y ago

> ChatGPT generates unhelpful, plausible-looking nonsense. I use ChatGPT daily to generate code in multiple languages. Not only does it generate complex code, but it can explain it and improve it when prompted to do so. It's mind blowing.

pmoriarty 4y ago

I'd recommend reading the Sparks of AGI paper[1] and watching the accompanying video[2] [1] - https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 [2] - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c