maxdoop

12 ms·

91.
by maxdoop 4y ago
My point isn’t that LLMs are anything more than pattern predictors; it’s that calling them such as some sort of dismissal doesn’t really strike me as the “gotcha” it initially seems. We don’t know that humans themselves aren’t just predicti
92.
by maxdoop 4y ago
This is true, but I fail to see how something like qualia ( the subjective experience ) necessarily matters. The thing I find interesting in the current LLM conversation is how much it’s opened up conversations around “what is knowing? What
93.
by maxdoop 4y ago
There’s a misunderstanding here— I’m not claiming LLMs are sentient. I’m not claiming they are even similar. What I am pushing back against is the confidence with which people so blatantly claim we are dissimilar. It’s an important distinct
94.
by maxdoop 4y ago
I like this answer. Makes sense. But doesn’t it imply that once we have something that can “see” its environment, hear nearby sounds, and have some sort of haptic sense — wouldn’t that be AI, then? Given your definition? If, of course, such
95.
by maxdoop 4y ago
And what is “knowing”? Everyone repeats the retort you gave, yet I’ve yet to see a clear definition of “knowing”.
96.
by maxdoop 4y ago
I struggle with this take as it’s not different from humans. Am I intelligent at age 3? Then I learn language. Am I intelligent? Then I progress through education. I become more and more intelligent as I am exposed to more data. I don’t kno
97.
by maxdoop 4y ago
Continue asking it to provide details and it can. Or , prior to asking it about performance, ask it to respond with as much detail as it can and have it include details you specially want to see. Comparing GPT-4 to a monkey with a typewrit
98.
by maxdoop 4y ago
While I’m aware of my own mediocre programming skills and by no means claim to be an expert, I’ve been a software engineer for 10+ years and have done pretty well for myself. I’d hope that doesn’t qualify for “quasi-technical”, but maybe yo
99.
by maxdoop 4y ago
Genuine question as I definitely need more to balance my own thinking — What has your experience with GPT been? For me, GPT-3 was not really useful as a software dev. But GPT-4 is miles ahead of that. It’s helped me write code maybe 4-8x fa
100.
by maxdoop 4y ago
What exactly is a novel idea? Is there any true “novelty” that just suddenly arises in a human brain without having prerequisite experience / knowledge?
101.
by maxdoop 4y ago
But still, what does it mean to know something? And your point about humans lying about knowledge only to be found inexperienced is quite the opposite of an LLM (albeit there is the hallucination problem, but GPT-4 is a massive improvement
102.
by maxdoop 4y ago
Apologies, I’m maybe low on coffee this morning. Do you mean things like tone, facial expression, the general “energy” around a conversation, etc?
103.
by maxdoop 4y ago
But what does it mean to “know” something? And when something gives the increasingly-accurate illusion of knowing, I fail to see how it matters (with regard to impact on society and overall utility). I’m not saying GPT-4 is this amazingly a
104.
by maxdoop 4y ago
I completely agree with you. Note that I’m not making those claims about sentience and similarity. What I am pushing back on is the confidence with which proclaim humans are “so different”, when I’ve yet to see actual proof of this dissimil
105.
by maxdoop 4y ago
I think there’s a huge misunderstanding of what “original ideas” are and what constitutes novelty. Mark Twain quote on originality: “ There is no such thing as a new idea. It is impossible. We simply take a lot of old ideas and put them int
106.
by maxdoop 4y ago
Then this implies that you’d maybe think differently if LLMs could have different inputs, correct? Which they are currently doing. GPT-4 can take visual input. I totally agree that humans are far more complex than that, but just extend your
107.
by maxdoop 4y ago
Humans require training data as well. And what do you think of the Mark Twain quote: “ There is no such thing as a new idea. It is impossible. We simply take a lot of old ideas and put them into a sort of mental kaleidoscope. We give them a
108.
by maxdoop 4y ago
I used “all” instead of “most”, which is indeed inaccurate. A better response would have been “a collection of humanity’s creativity”. However, you fail to recognize that OpenAI also created Whisper, which is a quote capable speech-to-text
109.
by maxdoop 4y ago
The gap between AI “acceptance / exploration” and “AI dismissal” continues to widen. Right now, the top post on HN is about how ChatGPT is “a glorified text prediction program.” Right under that post is this post.
110.
by maxdoop 4y ago
“It’s a glorified word predictor” is becoming increasingly maddening to read. Do tell— how can you prove humans are any different? The most common “proofs” I’ve seen: “Humans are more complex”. Ok, so you’re implying we add more complexity
111.
by maxdoop 4y ago
Can you explain your proof of that?
112.
by maxdoop 4y ago
For a supposed smart group of individuals who are good at leaning into the latest innovations, I feel most HN comments as of late are completely , ignorantly dismissive of LLMs simply because LLMs aren’t “amazingly perfect” in their current
113.
by maxdoop 4y ago
How do you know it won’t? I don’t mean to sound like a doomer , but I never see evidence for these claims around “AI not ever being creative like a human!” These AI’s are literally trained on all of human creativity… i struggle to see how
114.
by maxdoop 4y ago
HN is ridiculous at times. “Meh, most amazing technology since the internet? Lame. Tools that came out 8 hours ago still can’t do everything I imagine .”
115.
by maxdoop 4y ago
Is OpenAI just extremely prepared for their releases, or are they using their own tech to be extremely efficient? I'm imagining what their own programmers do each day, given direct access to the current most powerful models.
116.
by maxdoop 4y ago
Our of curiosity, what is GPT-4 getting wrong so often? It’s prettily wild to my own , admittedly easily impressed, mind.
117.
by maxdoop 4y ago
The author assumes that asking GPT to “take longer and reconsider” is something that an LLM actually does. As in, temporally. The author claims that “even after taking longer to reconsider” an answer, ChatGPT was still wrong. The author app
118.
by maxdoop 4y ago
I agree 100%. I don't understand why we can't look at the potential, or even current, capabilities of these LLMs and have a real conversation about how it might impact things. Yet so many folks here just confidently dismiss it. &q
119.
by maxdoop 4y ago
I find it equally worrying how so many techies continue to dismiss LLMs as “bullshit generators “. I struggle to see how even the current GPT-4 is any worse than your average human. How this is dismissed because it’s not 100% perfect (might
120.
by maxdoop 4y ago
As with every thread on this: Define “knowing”, and then say why it even matters if an LLM gives a great illusion of knowing.

More ›