3 ms·
I didn't say anything about existential risk, and I'm going to assume you meant LLM since training a NN to solve sudoku puzzles has been something you could do
by selalipop 3y ago
I didn't say anything about existential risk, and I'm going to assume you meant LLM since training a NN to solve sudoku puzzles has been something you could do as an into to ML project going years back: https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.08028 https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.08028
To me the existential risks are pretty boring and current LLMs are already capable of them: train on some biased data, people embed LLMs in a ton of places, the result is spreading bias in a black box where introspection is significantly harder.
In some ways it mirrors the original stochastic parrot warning, except "parrot" is a much significantly less loaded term in this context.
- climatologist 3y agoThen I don't know what you're arguing about. If you think LLMs are useful continue using them.