gwoolhurme

7 ms·

31.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I don't mean to be so dark... it is just I get so worried about the future. It might be age, it might be that i clawed my way to a tiny bit of stability. Things could be great, I actually have seen you in a few threads and you always s
32.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
Ah I did say they were proofs... that is my fault, what I mean to say is that formalization is the way they are written, is very much a language. Either way. Not sure where the venom was coming from
33.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I never said they were proofs right? I am still confused. I was talking about foramalizing and how at least to me I see programming in it. Even something extremely complex like "The Strong Perfect Graph Theorem" is still readable
34.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
We might have different definitions my good sir. Granted I don't have a PhD in math and my math stopped at a masters. To me formalization is theorems and proofs, which are 100% comprehensible to humans. For reference: http:/&#x2F
35.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
Just to play with the logic a bit. I could see natural language coming up with formal templating to get something closer to a programming language. Not like how we speak will change, but more like how a haiku works is formalized. Similarly
36.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
Yeah. The first time I saw Haskell written out, it felt like a blending of formal math and programming. I was really excited at how it looks like it could have come from my discrete math book. I don't think programming in english is a
37.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
When I made this comparison I was trashed in the comments. Not at the hyperbole of it (I don't think it is), that they are in poverty now while we are not. That we should have saved money. Which, shocker, not all of us work in Californ
38.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I feel a lot like you do some days. I am really confused and anxiety driven about a lot of things since AI became the hot button issue. Not sure why this is being flagged and downvoted. It's logically fine. I'd rather hear argumen
39.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
"I don't think it's a threat. I think it's a benefit. People can find better things to do with their life than work for a living... Pretty much every job involving paperwork should be automatable." How the fuck does
40.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I've been really shocked at the pure clickbait from BI, it's been insane since GPT made mainstream. Every other article is about how AI is taking tech jobs (which is also ironic as is a journalist isn't on the theoretical cho
41.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
Again I could be a massive idiot, but as I see it? For certain things yes 100%. When it comes to low level things, currently an LLM has no way to confirm behavior of something that doesn't give feedback. The FairPlay example I gave req
42.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
No? Maybe if they reach human levels of sensory and cognition. For example, again, my FairPlay problem. On iOS 16 there is a timing issue when DRM can be ingested, but this isn’t documented from apple and it is kind of a rare problem. If I
43.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
The problem I think I’m not conveying correctly is human to human discovery is made easier with communication hubs like SO. With something like an LLM if that reduces the viability for economically running a site like SO. Is there a gap or
44.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
If it is a community effort yes. Yes we are. That’s the idea of SO. It’s a community effort. Highly flawed and elitist yes, but the theory is it is community policed.
45.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
That still doesn’t answer my question on human to human discovery. Say a site like SO disappears because it’s not viable economically to keep it running. Then having something that scrapes the internet doesn’t seem to help does it? Like a q
46.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
The “why” is another great example too. When you document something you try to do so with some way of showing intent as well. While LLMs are so amazing (really). There is still a lot that I get curious about how it can be effectively used.
47.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
Maybe, however there seems to be a limit to that no? I’m not talking about errors that are fixed or factual information. More like discoveries, ex: the FairPlay issue wasn’t documented from Apple it was discovered by multiple users who foun
48.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
Maybe I’m slow and stupid, can someone explain to me how new things will be introduced to new forms of LLMs if it all slowly becomes replaced by LLMs? It seems a bit like an ouroboros of human generated content consumption. Also, SO is flaw
49.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I personally think the same as the other comment. Do you really think money is the bottleneck? Let’s assume Sam Altman felt that way. He couldn’t drum up that cash tomorrow if he wanted??? For the pinnacle of human invention. Twitter was pu
50.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I have no idea. Probably not. The philosophy is a deep rabbit hole. A fun one to ponder, and I like having that discussion. Maybe the more cynical pragmatic old man swe that I am sees a super powerful calculator kind of. It’s very very cool
51.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
Exactly AutoGPT is exactly what he is describing but I’m still lost as to what the verbiage is then. Is that the singularity?
52.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
What does a better LLM mean? We again… already have terminal usage in AutoGPT. It describes a little what you are talking about. What measurement do you use to test if a language model 1 is better than 2? Accuracy? Self reliance? Is that wh
53.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I don’t see that in this specific case for one thing or how we are closer from before. Code generation and auto correction getting closer is very cool, the singularity needs to be spelled out for me how a tool making a tool will get us ther
54.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
God damn the down votes. I agree with your overall thesis I don’t personally know what intelligence means. However it’s just a tool even if it is AI or whatever you want to label it. It’s extremely cool and powerful too. It scares the shit
55.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
Could you explain in detail how that causes the singularity? I’m lost. I saw a cool tool used to make another cool tool. You saw the singularity. Where is this logic coming from? Why would terminal access which I’m fairly certain I’ve seen
56.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
If you really do feel that way. Honest non troll question. Why not quit? There still seems plenty of software work even if there was a feedback loop in the workflow. However if you feel we’ve wrote our selves out why not do something more p
57.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I’m not the only one who thinks there is something missing though. That simplification does work to show how to get from A to B, but I don’t think it is analogous when we don’t really understand how we go to human intelligence. None of us w
58.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
I’m not saying they can’t show intelligence. I am saying that the techniques are very old, throwing more hardware seems to have done wonders. It’s been surprising to see how far it’s come. I don’t think that simplifying intelligence in huma
59.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
That wasn’t the case at all for fusion. It is that to be viable different scientific breakthroughs in particle physics, and lasers. Especially to the point where the demo recently showed the viability of it. If you read up on it you’ll see
60.
by gwoolhurme 3y ago
That is actually a really interesting find. Some of the verbiage is parallel to the hype we have around AGI right now too "fusion by 1990 instead of 2000..." does that not sound exactly like AGI in X year up from Y year that we re

More ›