3 ms·

Yes. And at which point do people accept that this is the level at which plenty of humans operate? But the analogy fails because especially in mystery novels th

by creer 3y ago

Yes. And at which point do people accept that this is the level at which plenty of humans operate? But the analogy fails because especially in mystery novels there is space for a lot of explicit logic reasoning: build a chart of which evidence exists, of what it means about each person, or what that means about the evidence, etc. Current models do not (yet) do that. Most mystery novels are NOT about predicting the next word. If anything they are anti-predicting the next word (because if that plot has already been done, that's a lot less valuable novel.) But then also very few humans do such analytic decisions or charts. That's not how most humans live their lives. It does not make sense to place the bar for "Yep this is AGI" at "mystery writer" (or "super scientist"). Seems to me, mostly humans just predict the next word. Not even very well.

TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
> And at which point do people accept that this is the level at which plenty of humans operate? I think you underestimate humans. One thing that humans (and many animals) are that LLMs aren’t, is goal-orientated. We are capable of recognizing something we want and planning and executing a course of action to achieve it - this includes what we say; what we say is determined by our goals/objectives. LLMs do nothing of the sort. All their output is based on their training data - i.e. the “choices” aren’t made by the LLM but by the generator of the original training data.
- Davidzheng 3y ago
  Most things i say aren't really goal oriented. I would put it at 10%
  - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
    If you are hungry you go find food and eat it. If you are bored you go find something fun to do. Most of our actions, if not all, are to satisfy one need or another. Satisfying that need is the goal.
- creer 3y ago
  Some humans - perhaps many here - are reasoning-obsessive-compulsive. But most human it feels, and myself much of the time, are on auto-pilot. When I'm driving back home from an event I don't need to reason about anything. I can have a conversation with my friend next to me. -- and I will often even forget that I'm giving that friend a ride back and miss their exit - because I'm too much on auto-pilot. I am just guessing the next word (in my driving). It's a hyper-alert kind of guessing the next word but I'm not reasoning until something really unexpected happens. And even then I may not have the time. I argue that even when I have to take the train and check the schedule, I do that on "guess-the-next-word" kind of auto-pilot. Yes I look up a database (train schedule) but I'm not reinventing the text. I've done it enough times, I'm looking up the database while guessing the next word. Totally within sight for LLMs. You mention "capable". Yeah many humans are capable of reasoning through their day to day life. But many are absolutely not. If you ask them to enumerate the steps needed to take the bus, they will fail. Not because they can't take the bus but because they never think of it explicitely. Never "reason" about it.
  - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
    You are still goal-oriented. If you are hungry, you go look for food then consume said food if you find any. If you are bored, you look for entertainment - e.g. calling one of your friends (who isn’t a complete bore). It doesn’t have to involve complex reasoning.

by creer 3y ago

TerrifiedMouse 3y ago

> And at which point do people accept that this is the level at which plenty of humans operate? I think you underestimate humans. One thing that humans (and many animals) are that LLMs aren’t, is goal-orientated. We are capable of recognizing something we want and planning and executing a course of action to achieve it - this includes what we say; what we say is determined by our goals/objectives. LLMs do nothing of the sort. All their output is based on their training data - i.e. the “choices” aren’t made by the LLM but by the generator of the original training data.

Davidzheng 3y ago
Most things i say aren't really goal oriented. I would put it at 10%
- TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
  If you are hungry you go find food and eat it. If you are bored you go find something fun to do. Most of our actions, if not all, are to satisfy one need or another. Satisfying that need is the goal.
creer 3y ago
Some humans - perhaps many here - are reasoning-obsessive-compulsive. But most human it feels, and myself much of the time, are on auto-pilot. When I'm driving back home from an event I don't need to reason about anything. I can have a conversation with my friend next to me. -- and I will often even forget that I'm giving that friend a ride back and miss their exit - because I'm too much on auto-pilot. I am just guessing the next word (in my driving). It's a hyper-alert kind of guessing the next word but I'm not reasoning until something really unexpected happens. And even then I may not have the time. I argue that even when I have to take the train and check the schedule, I do that on "guess-the-next-word" kind of auto-pilot. Yes I look up a database (train schedule) but I'm not reinventing the text. I've done it enough times, I'm looking up the database while guessing the next word. Totally within sight for LLMs. You mention "capable". Yeah many humans are capable of reasoning through their day to day life. But many are absolutely not. If you ask them to enumerate the steps needed to take the bus, they will fail. Not because they can't take the bus but because they never think of it explicitely. Never "reason" about it.
- TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
  You are still goal-oriented. If you are hungry, you go look for food then consume said food if you find any. If you are bored, you look for entertainment - e.g. calling one of your friends (who isn’t a complete bore). It doesn’t have to involve complex reasoning.