3 ms·
Seems like another case of LLMs taking credit for their training data without giving proper attribution, similar to the navier stokes case.
by qoez 19d ago
Seems like another case of LLMs taking credit for their training data without giving proper attribution, similar to the navier stokes case.
- KingMob 19d agoExcept they didn't actually solve it, they just suggested it was a book cipher, which was a known strategy.
- geraneum 19d agoApparently neither found it worth pursuing, and just phoned it in. > “…leider gerade keine zeit das nachzuschauen.“
- Traster 19d agoYes, imagine it's a book cipher and then you hand it to a tool which famously has had every book in existence cleaved apart and fed into it.
- vidarh 18d agoThe number of permutations you can try to decode a book cipher is near infinite. Just "a book cipher" does not tell you how the numbers map to words or characters in each book. You just try creating random book ciphers and see whether an LLM would solve them without hints.
- Closi 19d agoAnd it's not like it was a load of detail either, it's a comment on a blog 16 years ago. You don't get points for throwing out a possibility for the type of cipher, you get points for solving it.
- onesandofgrain 19d agoAgreed, pr and nothing more. Just more stealing from big corps
- ueueh 19d agoYup. Listen there’s no doubt LLM’s are powerful. BUT THEY RELY ON HUMAN INPUTS. It’s getting tiresome seeing the same bull shit over and over. The labs have invested hundreds of billions and now need to show RSI. It’s not happening and won’t happen. Without continual new information supplied by humans the models would freeze.
- xnickb 19d agoThe question for me is where it leaves innovation. Have we really peaked as a species that we so easily want to give up on the young and hand them over a tool that would substitute reasoning? Call me naive or old, but I don't see a need to think critically when you have a tool that can outmatch you in that. I tried drawing analogies with Chess, but it doesn't work. Shall I ask AI to do that for me?
- dvfjsdhgfv 19d ago> The question for me is where it leaves innovation. Have we really peaked as a species that we so easily want to give up on the young and hand them over a tool that would substitute reasoning? This is a crucial question but I'm afraid the ship has sailed. We should focus on how to prevent atrophy and cultivate our skills in spite of LLMs. For me and many others this means doing thins the old way with occasional assistance from LLMs that actually increase our understanding. Occassional because if you do it often, you get intellectual atrophy because you stop even trying.
- xnickb 19d agoThis is all valid and I am with you here. However I can totally imagine kids in 10 years viewing writing code by hand same as we view making fire using flint and steel: yes can be useful, but why bother? Except in this case I fear we're losing something very important as opposed to the above example.
- jackeee1 19d ago[dead]
- vovavili 19d agoI would argue that elaborating on scattered bits and pieces found here and there throughout the Internet is enormously valuable. Fair attribution is the tricky part.
- Culonavirus 19d agoEVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
- semiquaver 19d agoThe goalposts will continue moving until morale improves.