3 ms·
> Progress is still tracking the steep part of the S-curve, and there's no indication that they're near the top yet. If I understand it correctly, that seems t
by crote 3y ago
> Progress is still tracking the steep part of the S-curve, and there's no indication that they're near the top yet.
If I understand it correctly, that seems to be exactly what this paper is suggesting.
Scoring high on the bar exam is pretty trivial for AI - the data needed for that is fairly generic and widely available on the internet. It requires you to demonstrate a relatively basic understanding of the concepts by answering a bunch of multiple-choice answers. If anything, I'd expect AI to have a perfect score.
Like I said, such an AI is not entirely useless. You can replace quite a few legal assistants with that, and I bet it could be used to create first drafts or to expand a core concept into a full legal argument. There is plenty of money to be made there, and it's going to make an awful lot of people jobless. But that's just replacing more-trivial jobs with automation, it doesn't add anything novel to society.
On the other hand, the actual difficult work involves being able to come up with completely novel concepts, and being able to expand upon some obscure but crucial stuff few people have ever heard about. Current models simply aren't capable of that, and the results achieved here with multimodal models suggests that they never will. We risk getting stuck with models which can do some trivial work, but silently produce complete garbage when you ask them to do anything providing substantial value.
- pas 3y agowhat is novel? what if you couple a random text generator with a picture generator, isn't each new picture novel? if we could send all artists to work in the healthcare mines we might discover new treatment for various ailments. is that not novel? is that too indirect? increasing "economic surplus with externalities factored in" is good for society even if it's not novel. arguably philosophers come up with novel stuff all the time, and ... > Current models simply aren't capable of that, and the results achieved here with multimodal models suggests that they never will. can you elaborate on this a bit please?
- yladiz 2y ago> if we could send all artists to work in the healthcare mines we might discover new treatment for various ailments. is that not novel? is that too indirect? You do realize that artists are artists because they want to be, and even if AI can create art, artists will still be artists, right? They won't just be like, "Oh, AI is good at generating art now? Whelp time to go become a doctor."
- chefandy 2y agoWait, you're saying people's brains aren't fungible compute cycles? Casually discussing people's lives as top-down resource allocation problems is one of the things I hate most about how "tech optimists" discuss this.