deltaninenine

8 ms·

1.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>Or just look at the votes on our comments. Votes are a popularity contest. I have a lot of downvotes. So you win the popularity contest. It's fine. Im ok with that. I'm more going for the correctness contest here. Who's a
2.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
No. You just mis expressed your point with a logical mistake. You wanted to explain why I can't find evidence for the Eliza effect on HN, but you didn't realize that it contradicts your overall point of the effect. I exploited the
3.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
Don't actually understand your joke here.
4.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
When you delete things from your hard drive that fits the definition of making your computer forget something. Look up the definition of forget. It is not a human exclusive action. Therefore it is not "anthropomorphizing": https:
5.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>That's repeated a lot but it's not entirely accurate. No one can explain how an LLM gives the answers it does (not even the LLM). Uh I literally said no one fully understands these networks. And you go on to say that my statem
6.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>Bing search and customer service chatbots, for example, give a layer of indirection There is no layer of indirection you are directly chatting with the AI. You are not having a third party describing his experience with the AI to you. &
7.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>doesn't actually happen often enough to care about. That's my entire point. It doesn't happen often enough to care about. Sounds like you have some anecdotal experience of it happening to your entire family and a lot of y
8.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>A significant portion of the American population doesn't accept the results of the 2020 election. No amount of proof will change their mind. This is different. There's obvious bias here. Many people don't want to believe
9.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>Some experts, and lots of people who have not themselves built LLMs, such as Elon Musk, Yuval Noah Harari, Steve Wozniak. Never denied this. I did not intentionally hide this. I will say your statement did not mention that one of the si
10.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
That's just your opinion. I say we need to prove this out. If a significant portion of the tech and non techy population anthropomorphized LLMs to the point where they don't understand that LLMs hallucinate then surely some of tho
11.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>People’s susceptibility to anthropomorphizing an even slightly convincing computer program has been known since ELIZA, one of the first chatbots, in 1966. It’s called the ELIZA effect. I'm tired of these arguments. Very very few pe
12.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
The problem is this type of intelligence is hard to define or quantify. Its like asking the question " what is art and what is not art". Data driven hiring practices require hard definitions. One of these hard definition of intell
13.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
I'm referring to the public. Not the submission.
14.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>The wisdom of the ages speaks of being ten times better. This is an efficiency move. Cut the human out of the loop. Looks like the failure is less about creating an assembly line and more about creating a mobile assembly line.
15.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
Google it. Its well known.
16.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
Long term damage to liver. You use it long enough your liver will die. But it's too hard to do a causal analysis on this as the timelines are measured in decades.
17.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
It is true that in science nothing can be proven but this fact doesn't apply if you think in terms of statistics. Science is broad and doesn't always give answers in terms of a boolean falsification. You can be given a ratio as th
18.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
The GP didn't talk about a certain nuance and used evidence based medicine to cover all forms of science. A double blind placebo trial is the gold standard for testing causality. We don't have to go that far. We can use a hybrid o
19.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
Don't characterize the public as that stupid. The current risks of AI are startling clear to a layman. The extinction level even is more far fetched to a layman. You are the public and your viewpoint is aligned with the public. Nobody
20.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
It is technically biased. But biased towards truth.
21.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
Logical Induction has been successful in predicting future events.
22.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
>Historically humans are not outcompeted by new tools, but humans using old tools are outcompeted by humans using new tools. It’s not “all humans vs the new tool”, as the tool has no agency. Two things. First LLMs display more agency the
23.
by deltaninenine 3y ago
It's arrived at through induction. Induction is logic involving probability. Probabilistic logic and predictions of the future are valid logic that has demonstrably worked in other situations so if such logic has a level of validity th