4 ms·
Think about how dramatic a change it was when computers started being able to efficiently add those numbers and got better than them. Now no matter what the hum
by vikramkr 3y ago
Think about how dramatic a change it was when computers started being able to efficiently add those numbers and got better than them. Now no matter what the human's capacity a huge number of them have a computer in their pocket that can fill in the gaps. And that change was wildly disruptive. Same as when machines started to do tasks that humans couldn't. Any time a relatively accessible technology overtakes humans in a thing that used to be human-only and is important to civilization it's been highly disruptive. If gpt's reasoning is good enough to replace like, the lowest level of phone tech support or the like, that's already jobs that'll be lost.
- throwanem 3y agoThat "if" is doing a lot of legwork here. Most notably, it's concealing an implication that the LLM may be reasoning in this example, and not merely fitting tokens from its input into a statistical reconstruction of the most basic and thus likely most commonly encountered proof in elementary symbolic logic. That said, you're not wrong that this seems "good enough" to be wildly disruptive. Part of that disruption, which is already ongoing, is the development of a whole new class of exploits. I expect once companies start firing phone support representatives in favor of LLMs, and similar, this process will accelerate in fascinating ways.