4 ms·
I'm an AI pessimist, but even I see the value in the current large language models. If we can do it for the price of a few cracked atoms, that would be better.
by workingdog 2y ago
I'm an AI pessimist, but even I see the value in the current large language models. If we can do it for the price of a few cracked atoms, that would be better.
- singularity2001 2y agoInstead of adding more energy they should focus on photonics which is 10000x more efficient computing TsingHua university just published another step forward to feasibility
- ffhhj 2y agoI'm an AI optimist but LLMs are still too primitive and burning resources too soon on them is a waste. Imagine nuclear powered ENIACs. The research should continue and Close AI haven't got to the pinacle of AI.
- hakfoo 2y agoI think what would make LLMs much more viable is if they had more of a sense of credibility. They've developed a reputation of being very confident generators of bullshit, and that's completely fatal in compliance-oriented environments. If I ask Zesty Autocorrect to generate a snippet for me, but then I have to carefully inspect and review it to make sure it actually does what I wanted, I may as well spend the same amount of time just building what I wanted in the first place. Trading off 30 minutes of coding and testing for 45 minutes of code review and testing isn't a win. I will admit to having found a use case for an AI model; I spend a fair bit of time using Stable Diffusion locally trying to roll some new desktop wallpaper, but if my anime-style vampire prince has a hallucinated third nipple, nobody's going to die or go bankrupt.