10 ms·

In the same sense everyone stopped being awed by the ability to communicate and share libraries of art, video, and text 100000X greater than every king in recor

In the same sense everyone stopped being awed by the ability to communicate and share libraries of art, video, and text 100000X greater than every king in recorded human history for free. It's not going away, it's going to become embedded in our lives and taken for granted.

sfpotter 3y ago
That’s a good thing. Maybe then people will stop fixating on whether it’s sentient and acclimatize themselves to the fact that it’s just an inanimate tool for us to use.
- IIAOPSW 3y ago
  You can't even define sentience so what makes you so sure which other things do or don't have it?
  - fnordpiglet 3y ago
    More to the point, who cares? Whatever it is, it’s emergent properties are amazing. The “is it sentient” stuff distracts from the miracle.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - coffeefirst 3y ago
    That's kind of the point. There's a pretty long history of humans talking to trees, rivers, tombstones, cool looking mountains, and household shrines. We'll anthropomorphize anything. This is not a bad thing, but it's a very predictable thing. We're making inanimate objects simulate talking to you, and we're going to see consciousness when it's not there.
gremlinsinc 3y ago
I personally think "chatGPT", will be a blip, it'll be remembered as a catalyst, not much more, and I'm not sure openAI really should have the valuation they do, open source is going to eat their dinner, when it takes openai 10 million dollars and an army from Kenya to create the same language a college student can build on a 2k computer for under $100 in cloud fees, it's pretty much game over... Microsoft on the other hand, because of the way they're pouncing on this and implementing it across all their products, they're the ones who really won here. In 5 years it'll be the stable diffusions and alpaca's, and other open source models ruling and closed source will be mostly for vertical specific custom use cases. Generative AI on the hand --- it's never going back to the way it was before, not unless we have a Carrington event, that is.
- jdiez17 3y ago
  You are confused about what costs $10m to train (a base LLM) vs. $100 (fine tuning a pre-trained LLM).

sfpotter 3y ago

That’s a good thing. Maybe then people will stop fixating on whether it’s sentient and acclimatize themselves to the fact that it’s just an inanimate tool for us to use.

IIAOPSW 3y ago
You can't even define sentience so what makes you so sure which other things do or don't have it?
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  More to the point, who cares? Whatever it is, it’s emergent properties are amazing. The “is it sentient” stuff distracts from the miracle.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- coffeefirst 3y ago
  That's kind of the point. There's a pretty long history of humans talking to trees, rivers, tombstones, cool looking mountains, and household shrines. We'll anthropomorphize anything. This is not a bad thing, but it's a very predictable thing. We're making inanimate objects simulate talking to you, and we're going to see consciousness when it's not there.

gremlinsinc 3y ago

I personally think "chatGPT", will be a blip, it'll be remembered as a catalyst, not much more, and I'm not sure openAI really should have the valuation they do, open source is going to eat their dinner, when it takes openai 10 million dollars and an army from Kenya to create the same language a college student can build on a 2k computer for under $100 in cloud fees, it's pretty much game over... Microsoft on the other hand, because of the way they're pouncing on this and implementing it across all their products, they're the ones who really won here. In 5 years it'll be the stable diffusions and alpaca's, and other open source models ruling and closed source will be mostly for vertical specific custom use cases. Generative AI on the hand --- it's never going back to the way it was before, not unless we have a Carrington event, that is.

jdiez17 3y ago
You are confused about what costs $10m to train (a base LLM) vs. $100 (fine tuning a pre-trained LLM).