6 ms·
First, there has to be something capable of matching human performance at a much higher cost. This is still just spicy autocomplete.
by KerrAvon 3y ago
First, there has to be something capable of matching human performance at a much higher cost. This is still just spicy autocomplete.
- Waterluvian 3y agoHumans just do spicy autocomplete too.
- goatlover 3y agoNo they don't. You're "just" doing what everyone else in the past has done with the brain/human intelligence and using the latest technology as a metaphor without realizing it.
- Waterluvian 3y agoWe want to think we’re exceptional but all we can do is say “human consciousness is special” without having any way of measuring it or disproving the assertion that we’re just really fancy pattern matchers. Take any metaphor you want, it’s the same outcome: we may all be philosophical zombies.
- roarcher 3y agoWe may "just" be neural networks that run on meat instead of silicon, but that does not mean that we're LLMs.
- Waterluvian 3y agoWhy doesn’t it?
- marginalia_nu 3y agoIt's a formal logical error. One does not follow from the other without affirming the consequent.
- roarcher 3y agoBecause not all neural networks are LLMs. A GAN is a neural network, does that make it an LLM?
- hkt 3y agoWe have inputs other than words, for a start
- goatlover 3y agoI’m conscious, maybe you’re not? Not that I really believe that. I think you probably see colors and hear sounds, even in your dreams! But engineering types tend to be persuaded by a particular view of the world, failing to understand that it is a view and not nature itself.
- not2b 3y agoNo, a human isn't born with a set of knowledge like a freshly trained LLM, keeping the model fixed and responding to input. The analog to the model changes based on the human's experience. Just making bigger and bigger LLMs won't give you this.
- Waterluvian 3y agoSo a human is different because it keeps training its neural network?
- eurekin 3y agoWhoa, imagine you get a good base LLM model and save all conversations with it. Run a batch process every night to fine tune a LORA on convo dataset. If I ever came across such a chat bot I'd probably freak out as to why it remembers things outside of the context window, without summarisation
- MichaelZuo 3y agoThat's a pretty neat idea, I would be surprised if no one is already working on that.
- catchnear4321 3y agomonkeys make monkeys accidentally. monkeys make meseeks on purpose. there is a difference, but will it be fun?
- Waterluvian 3y agoI am 100% invested in how much ridiculous fun this era is going to be. Right up until the moment when it becomes a horror.
- gerdesj 3y agoReally? I can guess at what spicy autocomplete might actually mean but I doubt a LLM ... OK ChatGPT did a pretty good job of it (I've just asked it), whilst sidestepping the definition of spicy in this context. It is after all a very good next word guesser, given a context, and its not ... me! I am capable of hallucinating but it was 30 odd years ago since I hunted out certain fungi on Dartmoor, or smoked hemp. To be fair, we humans do often interrupt each other to second guess a sentence completion. Done correctly it is a brief satisfying collaboration. Done wrong ... I've been married for 18 years and know when to bite my tongue, but I still get it wrong from time to time - sometimes deliberately. Despite that, me and the wiff can autocomplete each other's sentences with uncanny accuracy and end up with perfect harmony or a cough slight disagreement as a result. We are getting some phenomenal slide rules these days but the darleks are not going to be flying up the stairwell just yet, nor will SkyNet be taking over tomorrow. That said, you just know that some noddy is trying to sell a nuclear "deterrent" LLM AI thingie somewhere. Thankfully, production military equipment takes quite a while to get to deployment. There is a good chance that we will get to grips with all this stuff before SkyNet is let loose for real 8)
- enterprise_cog 3y agoMaybe you do. Luckily, not everyone is quite so simple.