3 ms·
> I think we have a winner... It makes me sad that the complete and total lack of an objective way to measure these products means that the coming decades will
by ajross 3y ago
> I think we have a winner...
It makes me sad that the complete and total lack of an objective way to measure these products means that the coming decades will be filled with this kind of hyper-specific gotcha test made in inappropriately confident internet posts.
Literally this could have been down to one extra book in someone's training corpus, or a tokenizer that failed to understand λ as a non-letter. But no matter, "we have a winner!". It's the computer science equivalent of declaring global warming a fraud because it snowed last night.
- dreamcompiler 3y agoDisagree. People are going to rely on these things, and when they make stupid but confident mistakes (i.e. they produce bullshit), they are dangerous. An AI system that produces right answers 90% of the time but 10% of the time drives your car into a lane divider, or says "there are 4 US states that start with 'K'" or "Napoleon was defeated at the Battle of Gettysburg" is worse than useless: It's dangerous. As long as we call it a bullshit parlor trick, no problem. But unfortunately people are making important decisions based on these things.
- LightMachine 3y agoYou're completely wrong. Gemini can perfectly understand what is being asked, so this isn't a syntax issue. Notice that, on the answer, it even states the solution: "starting from 1, and combining `* 2`, `* 3` and `+ 5`, we must reach 17`". So it does fine with reading the formal syntax, yet it fails to combine these operations to get from "1" to "17", which is something most 10 yo kids would have no trouble doing. And that's after millions spent in training. Now tell me again this is the architecture that will figure out the cure of cancer?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]