3 ms·

It's not theft in the same way a con artist convinces you to give him all your money. The people using it or their employers just don't realize any competitor w

It's not theft in the same way a con artist convinces you to give him all your money. The people using it or their employers just don't realize any competitor will be able to ask the LLM to replicate their product and it will copy the codebase they uploaded to them.

scrollaway 4mo ago
This isn’t how training works.
- skeptic_ai 4mo ago
  I think he’s saying let’s say I’m your competitor and I need your code and you happen to use the same llm they will provide me a copy of your code.
  - rcxdude 4mo ago
    Yeah, which hasn't been demonstrated in practice at all.
    - davebren 4mo ago
      It has. LLMs being able to one-shot any higher-order complexity is entirely dependent on it already being in the training data.
      - scrollaway 4mo ago
        If it has been demonstrated, you're welcome to cite a paper or even study of any kind. Right now, you're just guessing. (I head an AI lab, FYI)
        davebren 4mo ago
        You could just test it for yourself if you're actually interested in finding out (assuming you are a decent programmer, but your bio suggests you have no technical expertise in the area).
        scrollaway 4mo ago
        I was working in machine learning before you were old enough to take programming classes. https://github.com/jleclanche https://github.com/jleclanche As I said, I founded and run a AI lab. Now get over yourself.
        davebren 4mo ago
        First I never made any claims about myself or appealed to my authority, that was you. I still don't see any evidence of any technical expertise in ML or in programming anything more complicated than python scripts. Maybe you weren't aware but often on the internet people make false claims about their expertise on something. There's thousands of "Visionary leader driving ethical AI innovation and strategic growth" CEOs that know next to nothing about the actual technology. Anyway like I said you can just test it out yourself and find out that I'm correct. Every skilled programmer already knows this and can predict what kind of complexity an LLM won't be able to handle. And anyone working on LLMs should know that they are completely dependent on their training data. The entire scaling hypothesis was based on this.
        scrollaway 4mo ago
        There's open source ML&DL projects dating back 12 years on my github, I don't know what you're on about. Regardless, your claim is "LLMs being able to one-shot any higher-order complexity is entirely dependent on it already being in the training data." which is currently unfalsifiable, and known by every AI researcher to be most likely wrong. You've also said it's "been demonstrated". So stop wasting people's time and link to the demonstration instead of hand-waving a "do it yourself you're smart". Good lord, it's like talking to a bloody climate change denier, I swear.

scrollaway 4mo ago

This isn’t how training works.

skeptic_ai 4mo ago
I think he’s saying let’s say I’m your competitor and I need your code and you happen to use the same llm they will provide me a copy of your code.
- rcxdude 4mo ago
  Yeah, which hasn't been demonstrated in practice at all.
  - davebren 4mo ago
    It has. LLMs being able to one-shot any higher-order complexity is entirely dependent on it already being in the training data.
    - scrollaway 4mo ago
      If it has been demonstrated, you're welcome to cite a paper or even study of any kind. Right now, you're just guessing. (I head an AI lab, FYI)
      - davebren 4mo ago
        You could just test it for yourself if you're actually interested in finding out (assuming you are a decent programmer, but your bio suggests you have no technical expertise in the area).
        scrollaway 4mo ago
        I was working in machine learning before you were old enough to take programming classes. https://github.com/jleclanche https://github.com/jleclanche As I said, I founded and run a AI lab. Now get over yourself.
        davebren 4mo ago
        First I never made any claims about myself or appealed to my authority, that was you. I still don't see any evidence of any technical expertise in ML or in programming anything more complicated than python scripts. Maybe you weren't aware but often on the internet people make false claims about their expertise on something. There's thousands of "Visionary leader driving ethical AI innovation and strategic growth" CEOs that know next to nothing about the actual technology. Anyway like I said you can just test it out yourself and find out that I'm correct. Every skilled programmer already knows this and can predict what kind of complexity an LLM won't be able to handle. And anyone working on LLMs should know that they are completely dependent on their training data. The entire scaling hypothesis was based on this.
        scrollaway 4mo ago
        There's open source ML&DL projects dating back 12 years on my github, I don't know what you're on about. Regardless, your claim is "LLMs being able to one-shot any higher-order complexity is entirely dependent on it already being in the training data." which is currently unfalsifiable, and known by every AI researcher to be most likely wrong. You've also said it's "been demonstrated". So stop wasting people's time and link to the demonstration instead of hand-waving a "do it yourself you're smart". Good lord, it's like talking to a bloody climate change denier, I swear.