5 ms·
2018: The best AIs can't pass an elementary school reading comprehension test. 2023: The best AIs score in the top 10% of law, medical, engineering exams, and
by p-e-w 4y ago
2018: The best AIs can't pass an elementary school reading comprehension test.
2023: The best AIs score in the top 10% of law, medical, engineering exams, and outperform licensed professionals on real-world tasks.
Please stop speculating. You don't know what we are (or aren't) "close" to.
- nikbackm 4y agoWe know how to do all those tasks and can provide the data for them, we don't know how to make a self-improving AI.
- _Algernon_ 4y agoThe transition between 2018 to 2023 is not a result of "self-improving" AI, so I'm not sure what your point is.
- JeremyBanks 4y ago[dead]
- Jackevansevo 4y agoYou obviously didn't read the article. The author argues that with current tech we'll eventually hit a bottle neck providing additional training data, which will limit any rapid self improvement. It's equally as speculative to assume we'll magically manage to overcome this challenge.
- ravenstine 4y agoSo what exactly do you disagree about with the commenter? If it's equally speculative, then what's your point?
- roflyear 4y agoThe more extraordinary claim is we're close to AGI not that we're far from AGI
- dmbche 4y agoRemember 2012? Both the people expecting the end of the world and the ones that were saying nothing was going to happen were speculating. We just need to stop giving attention to them, as it's just empty wind.
- hammyhavoc 4y agoIs this speculating or just parroting within the echo chamber? E.g., people who believed in 5G mind control, microchips in the COVID vaccines etc. They themselves just repeated what they heard. Like with the crypto hype cycle, people repeated all kinds of unfounded claims, but they themselves didn't come up with the idea. That the idea existed was all the "evidence" they needed for these things to be apparently true.
- dmbche 4y agoI guess at that point it's operationally the same - wether it's someone parrotting it or someone that actually has the opinion, both are saying nothing of value, just like with covid microchips and 5g!
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jacquesm 4y agoEither you're sarcastic or I fail to see those two as even remotely balanced. The world wasn't going to end. Neither will it end tomorrow morning at 9 am.[+] [+] And if it does good luck collecting on that ;)
- dingledork69 4y agoNot really. They are the top 10% of reddit users larping as doctors, and then again only when scored on being empathic. The things sure make convincing sounding spam machines, though. Great benefit to society.
- mrshadowgoose 4y agoBeginning of 2022: "Deep learning has hit its limits, we are an entering an AI winter!" Beginning of 2023: "GPT4 appears to demonstrate the ability to reason within certain constrained problem spaces." There is no human being on this planet that actually understands how general intelligence fundamentally works. It's incredible to see people so confidently setting concrete timelines on its rate of development.
- dmbche 4y agoDo you have a link for that? As far as I'm aware they were still hallucinating pretty hard and incredibly biased and overly agreeable.
- mrshadowgoose 4y agohttps://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 > As far as I'm aware they were still hallucinating pretty hard and incredibly biased and overly agreeable. Certainly. But those aren't blockers to displaying the ability to reason within limited contexts. There are hundreds of thousands of human beings that fit that description.
- dmbche 4y agoThanks for the paper! I'll be looking into it. The reason I'm bringing this up is that these issues, in humans, are solved by redundency (i.e. hiring someone else to look over their work). As long as errors persist and, more importantly, are impossible/hard to be warned of, competent humans will need to oversee and validate every word they type, making their "advantage" much more nuanced. It kind of turns into having a friend that can google pretty well answer your questions. I'm not an expert, feel free to show me wrong - I'm reading the paper now and expecting it to be at least a touch troubling :)
- MacsHeadroom 4y agoThere's another paper which showed GPT-4 (or was it 3.5?) going from something like 78% to 99.9% success on difficult multi-part reasoning tasks by running two copies of itself where one is an editor/reviewer. I'm on my phone at the moment. But maybe someone else can link it.
- dmbche 4y agoOh ahit do you have a source on ais outperforming liscenced professionals? I simply cant believe it
- roflyear 4y ago2002: phones as big as bricks. 2007: pocket computer. Don't tell me were not going to have brain computers in the next few years!