3 ms·

> If I understand right, GPT-3 is literally the complexity of a mid-sized rodent. You are not understanding things right, then. Intelligence is comprised of m

> If I understand right, GPT-3 is literally the complexity of a mid-sized rodent. You are not understanding things right, then. Intelligence is comprised of multiple complex systems. ChatGPT only ever claimed to focus on the language part. It does not contain reasoning. Even a rodent can reason. Much less complex organisms can reason, too.

ben_w 3y ago
> You are not understanding things right, then. GPT-3 has about the same number of free parameters as the number of synapses in a mid-sized rodent brain. > Intelligence is comprised of multiple complex systems. ChatGPT only ever claimed to focus on the language part. It does not contain reasoning. It (ChatGPT) is doing abstract symbol manipulation, unless you want to expand the idea of language to include chess positions (even if mediocrely), algebra, and the application of the rules of formal logic to the symbols used to represent those rules when it is so prompted. > Even a rodent can reason. > Much less complex organisms can reason, too. For which values of the meaning of the word "reason"? From your other comment "But I would define ability to reason as the ability to make logic conclusions based on input from a feedback loop." 1. This is a terrible waste of computer power, in the order of multiple-trillions-to-one ratio, given logic is the underlying thing used to represent the numbers and floating point operations that approximate linear algebra that in turn is used to build LLMs. (A similar ratio is also found in human "logical" cognition, and is why we don't use logic all the time, hence the classic example of "a baseball bat & ball that cost $1.10 together, the bat is $1 more expensive than the ball, how much does a bat cost?" which so many get wrong). 2. LLMs can do that anyway. Even literal flow charts are still doing that anyway, and LLMs can build flow charts. It still makes mistakes, sure, yup, but then the question is "how many compared to a human?" and that's terrifyingly close to humans and I'm just hoping it will remain on the same side, slightly worse — I mean, your own example is humans being fooled by it, so clearly you also know humans can be wildly wrong.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

ben_w 3y ago

> You are not understanding things right, then. GPT-3 has about the same number of free parameters as the number of synapses in a mid-sized rodent brain. > Intelligence is comprised of multiple complex systems. ChatGPT only ever claimed to focus on the language part. It does not contain reasoning. It (ChatGPT) is doing abstract symbol manipulation, unless you want to expand the idea of language to include chess positions (even if mediocrely), algebra, and the application of the rules of formal logic to the symbols used to represent those rules when it is so prompted. > Even a rodent can reason. > Much less complex organisms can reason, too. For which values of the meaning of the word "reason"? From your other comment "But I would define ability to reason as the ability to make logic conclusions based on input from a feedback loop." 1. This is a terrible waste of computer power, in the order of multiple-trillions-to-one ratio, given logic is the underlying thing used to represent the numbers and floating point operations that approximate linear algebra that in turn is used to build LLMs. (A similar ratio is also found in human "logical" cognition, and is why we don't use logic all the time, hence the classic example of "a baseball bat & ball that cost $1.10 together, the bat is $1 more expensive than the ball, how much does a bat cost?" which so many get wrong). 2. LLMs can do that anyway. Even literal flow charts are still doing that anyway, and LLMs can build flow charts. It still makes mistakes, sure, yup, but then the question is "how many compared to a human?" and that's terrifyingly close to humans and I'm just hoping it will remain on the same side, slightly worse — I mean, your own example is humans being fooled by it, so clearly you also know humans can be wildly wrong.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]