4 ms·

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

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.

visarga 4y ago
> This is AGI, now we are nit-picking. It's here. Hahaha, if you want nit-picking, all the language tasks chatGPT is good at are strictly human tasks. Not general tasks. Human tasks are all related to keeping humans alive and making more of us, they don't span the whole spectrum of possible tasks where intelligence could exist. Of course inside language tasks it is as general as can be, yet still needs to be placed inside a more complex system with tools to improve accuracy, LLM alone is like brain alone - not that great at everything.
l33tman 4y ago
Maybe it's heavily biased towards programming and computing questions? I've tested GPT-4 on numerous physics stuff and it fails spectacularly at almost all of them. It starts to hallucinate egregious stuff that's completely false, misrepresents articles it tries to quote as references etc. It's impressive as a glorified search engine in those cases but can't at all be trusted to explain most things unless they're the most canonical curriculum questions. This extreme difficulty in discerning what it hallucinates and what is "true" is what it's most obvious problem is. I guess it can be fixed somehow but right now it has to be heavily fact-checked manually. It does this for computing questions as well, but there is some selection bias so people tend to post the success-stories and not the fails. However it's less dangerous if it's in computing as you'll notice it immediately so maybe require less manual labour to keep it in check.
ChatGTP 4y ago
On the other hand if you browse around the web you will find various implementations of dirbuster, probably in C for sure in C++ which are multi-threaded , it’s not to take away from your experience but I mean, without knowing what’s in the training set it may have already been exposed to what you asked for, even several times over. I have a feeling they had access to a lot of code on GH, who knows how much code they actually accessed. Copilot for a long time said it would use your code as training data, including context, if you didn’t opt out explicitly, so that’s already millions maybe hundreds of millions of lines of code scraped. The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if MS just didn’t provide access to public and private code to train on, they wouldn’t have even told Open AI, just said, “here’s some nice data”, it’s all secret and we can’t see the models inputs so I’ll leave it at that. I mean they’ve obviously prepared the data for copilot, so it was there waiting to be trained on. So yeah I feel your enthusiasm but if you think about it a little more, or maybe not so hard to imagine what you saw being actually rather simple ? Every time I write code I feel kind of depressed because I know almost certainly someone has already written the same thing and that it’s sitting in GitHub or somewhere else and I’m wasting my time. ChatGPT just takes away the knowing where to find something (it’s already seen almost everything the average person can think of) you want and gives it to you directly. Have you never thought of this already ? Like you knew all the code you wanted already was there somewhere, but you just didn’t have an interface to get to it? I’ve thought about this for quite a while and I knew there would big data people doing experiments who could see that probably 80-90% of code on GitHub is pretty much identical. Nothing is magic, right ?

visarga 4y ago

> This is AGI, now we are nit-picking. It's here. Hahaha, if you want nit-picking, all the language tasks chatGPT is good at are strictly human tasks. Not general tasks. Human tasks are all related to keeping humans alive and making more of us, they don't span the whole spectrum of possible tasks where intelligence could exist. Of course inside language tasks it is as general as can be, yet still needs to be placed inside a more complex system with tools to improve accuracy, LLM alone is like brain alone - not that great at everything.

l33tman 4y ago

Maybe it's heavily biased towards programming and computing questions? I've tested GPT-4 on numerous physics stuff and it fails spectacularly at almost all of them. It starts to hallucinate egregious stuff that's completely false, misrepresents articles it tries to quote as references etc. It's impressive as a glorified search engine in those cases but can't at all be trusted to explain most things unless they're the most canonical curriculum questions. This extreme difficulty in discerning what it hallucinates and what is "true" is what it's most obvious problem is. I guess it can be fixed somehow but right now it has to be heavily fact-checked manually. It does this for computing questions as well, but there is some selection bias so people tend to post the success-stories and not the fails. However it's less dangerous if it's in computing as you'll notice it immediately so maybe require less manual labour to keep it in check.

ChatGTP 4y ago

On the other hand if you browse around the web you will find various implementations of dirbuster, probably in C for sure in C++ which are multi-threaded , it’s not to take away from your experience but I mean, without knowing what’s in the training set it may have already been exposed to what you asked for, even several times over. I have a feeling they had access to a lot of code on GH, who knows how much code they actually accessed. Copilot for a long time said it would use your code as training data, including context, if you didn’t opt out explicitly, so that’s already millions maybe hundreds of millions of lines of code scraped. The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if MS just didn’t provide access to public and private code to train on, they wouldn’t have even told Open AI, just said, “here’s some nice data”, it’s all secret and we can’t see the models inputs so I’ll leave it at that. I mean they’ve obviously prepared the data for copilot, so it was there waiting to be trained on. So yeah I feel your enthusiasm but if you think about it a little more, or maybe not so hard to imagine what you saw being actually rather simple ? Every time I write code I feel kind of depressed because I know almost certainly someone has already written the same thing and that it’s sitting in GitHub or somewhere else and I’m wasting my time. ChatGPT just takes away the knowing where to find something (it’s already seen almost everything the average person can think of) you want and gives it to you directly. Have you never thought of this already ? Like you knew all the code you wanted already was there somewhere, but you just didn’t have an interface to get to it? I’ve thought about this for quite a while and I knew there would big data people doing experiments who could see that probably 80-90% of code on GitHub is pretty much identical. Nothing is magic, right ?