adamsmith143

8 ms·

61.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
You should throw all your money in then. Meanwhile teams with good people who also have a good product are going to eat them for lunch.
62.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Yoshua Bengio, Andrew Ng, Anrej Karpathy, and many other of the top researchers in the field do not believe these models are stochastic parrots, they believe they have internal world models and prompts are methods to probe those world model
63.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
>Any source for that claim? Similarweb >And the post will remain in other regions peak hour when they visit it, not to mention it still peak hour for Canada, S.America and even parts of Europe too. It's not a particularly popular
64.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
I don't think referencing the value of consultants is going to help your argument lol.
65.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
A plurality of visitors to HN are from the US, the next largest source is 10x smaller. This post is during peak US hours. This website is owned and operated by a US based company. Its not absurd to imagine most post are going to be US foc
66.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
? Bitcoin is down 5% since Binance was sued...
67.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
What percentage of people worldwide use smartphones with no voice service at all? Including voip.
68.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Isn't the actual killer app for Advertisers? "Glue this thing to peoples faces and you now have the most effective most intrusive way to slam ads in front of people ever created!" Don't see why any consumer would buy thi
69.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Always interesting how crypto prices tank after legal action is announced against exchanges. Isn't the whole point to be decentralized in the first place? Hard to believe the whole dip is due to people wanting to get their tokens off t
70.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Strong "Just read the manual" vibes.
71.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
>Seems ridiculous to me, why would teens even have peer-reviewed papers, or even papers, to their name? Pretty much only because of this scam - so an automatic 'fraud' signal IMHO. For reference the comment I was responding to
72.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Plenty of teens have legitimate papers. Probably not first author but it's not hard to believe that an IOM Medalist could contribute to a Mathematics paper or an Intel Science winner would contribute to a Biology paper e.g.
73.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Plenty of jobs check your credentials before hiring already. It's not a significant burden.
74.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
ChatGPT is free to use. Stable Diffusion is free to use. Those are two of the largest if not the largest generative models out there.
75.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
This is a cute headline but let's see AMD put out some software to actually run DNN training on their hardware. Currently either impossible or too onerous to be worth the trouble.
76.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Why would this be scary? You've upgraded the productivity of maybe hundreds of millions of people.
77.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
>In other words, if you're skilled, there's nothing AI can do for you… Yet...
78.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
I think discounting future lives because you can't precisely count them is immoral at best and actively evil at worst.
79.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
The last gas I passed had 10^23 entropy fluctuations in it. So you're saying those are more important than the 100 Billion human lives that came before them?
80.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Exactly. Taken to the limit if you extrapolate how many future human lives could be extinguished by a runaway AI you get extremely unsettling answers. Like the expected value of a .01% change of extinction from AI might be Trillions of qual
81.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
The problem is that even with N years until we reach that point it seems likely that it would take 2*N years to build the proper safety mechanisms because at least currently capabilities research is racing far ahead of safety research. Of c
82.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
No man, the future of trillions of humans is obviously much less important than 1 person getting insulted on the internet.
83.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
>She's the first author of the stochastic parrots paper, That alone is enough to disqualify any of her opinions on AI.
84.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
Particularly ironic given this isn't actually what the focus on... https://www.safe.ai/ai-risk
85.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
If AI improves by 0.0001% per year on your favorite intelligence metric there will eventually be a point where it surpasses human performance and another point where it surpasses all humans combined on that metric. There is danger in that s
86.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
>Real risks are more in the category of systemic racism and sexism, deep fakes, over reliance on AI etc. This is a really bad take and risks missing the forest for the trees in a major way. The risks of today pale in comparison to the ri
87.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
>As far as a pandemic or nuclear war, though, I'd probably put it on more of the level of a K-T extinction event. Humans are doing some work on asteroid redirection, but I don't think it is a global priority. I think it's
88.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
This is a bad take. The statement is signed by dozens of Academics who don't have much profit motive at all. If they did they wouldn't be academics, they could easily cash in by starting a company or joining one of the big players
89.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
It's very clear that a strong AI/AGI would vastly surpass all humans combined. We've already seen shades of this with Chess AIs(all humans combined still can't beat a 3000 elo chess engine e.g.), hell even Kasparov vs th
90.
by adamsmith143 3y ago
>It can't translate whale song, or an extraterrestrial language, though it may opine on how to do so. Ok guys pack it up, LLM's can't be intelligent because they can't translate Whale Song. GG. I mean of all the AI Go

More ›