srslack

12 ms·

61.
by srslack 3y ago
Imagine thinking that regression based function approximators are capable of anything other than fitting the data you give it. Then imagine willfully hyping up and scaring people who don't understand, and because it can predict words y
62.
by srslack 3y ago
LeCun is reasonable, like a lot of researchers, and was a while back (in a way) perplexed that people are finding uses for these text predictions at all considering they're not really perfect. I'm not exactly ascribing bad faith t
63.
by srslack 3y ago
>Gary Marcus - Geometric Intelligence, a machine learning company If you want an actual contribution, we have no real way to actually gauge what is, and what actually is not, a superior, generalized, adaptable intelligence, or what archi
64.
by srslack 3y ago
So, my take is "according to our current understanding" and "artificial". Was a bit distracted. Now, theoretically, is it possible that an alien probe beaconed this solar system 3 billion years ago to a much more advance
65.
by srslack 3y ago
Certainly, you are. And you can adapt and generalize. Let's stop selling ourselves short, we're not a graph that looks vaguely like a neural network, yet isn't. We are the neural network.
66.
by srslack 3y ago
Have you used it outside of the training set? And have you actually used it for generalized tasks? Let's be kind to the LLM and define generalized to mean "do anything if it can be hammered into a textual interface." It fails
67.
by srslack 3y ago
All of those people have financial incentives to hype it. How curious that there's this great and very probable X-risk, yet they aren't going to stop their contributing to a potential X-risk. Dismissive of what? Science fiction st
68.
by srslack 3y ago
Let's ignore the fact that current state-of-the-art models will sit around and be stuck in its ReAct-CoT loop doing nothing for the most part, and when it's not doing jack shit it'll "role-play" that it's doing
69.
by srslack 3y ago
I spent my entire high school years immersed in science fiction. Gibson, Egan, Watts, PKD, Asimov. I have all of that and more, especially a Foundation set I painfully gathered, in hardbound right next to my stand up desk. I can imagine it,
70.
by srslack 3y ago
>1) Do you think that AI achieving superhuman cognitive abilities is unlikely/really far away? I think that an AI, a "generalized" intelligence with a generalized understanding, capable of performing every intellectual tas
71.
by srslack 3y ago
The moral responsibility rests with human beings. Just like you're responsible if your crappy "autonomous" drone crashes onto a patio and kills a guy. >e.g. mandating public registration of large models, safety standards e
72.
by srslack 3y ago
>I believe you have misunderstood the trajectory we are on. Yeah, I read Accelerando twice in high school, and dozens more. That doesn't make it real. >AGI might not be right round the corner, but it's coming all right, and
73.
by srslack 3y ago
Yes, that's correct. It is a slight rebuke, a bit tongue in cheek, but that paper is also old. I grouped them because the groups are, from my perspective, hard to separate. But there are arguably two camps, "AI safety" and &q
74.
by srslack 3y ago
Who prompted the future LLM, and gave it access to a root shell and an A100 GPU, and allowed it to copy over some python script that runs in a loop and allowed it to download 2 terabytes of corpus and trained a new version of itself for wee
75.
by srslack 3y ago
I agree with you that "AI safety" (let's call it bickering) and "alignment" should be separate. But I can't stomach the thought experiments. First of all, it takes a human being to guide these models, to host (
76.
by srslack 3y ago
Section 230 is not about preventing "harm" or anything like that, the specific section just provides civil immunity for moderation/removal of content that is deemed "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent
77.
by srslack 3y ago
>companies absolutely have an ethical responsibility about the programs, code and generated artifacts they release and what potential for abuse they have. If companies should be beholden to some ethical standard for the generations, they
78.
by srslack 3y ago
You can search LocalLLaMA on reddit for "harassed", I prefer not to link it because it specifically names the individual.
79.
by srslack 3y ago
>People who are afraid of unaligned AI aren't afraid that it will be impolite. People who are not afraid of it being impolite are afraid of science fiction stories about intelligence explosions and singularities. That's not a r
80.
by srslack 3y ago
There was a thread on huggingface with a bunch of hysteria and an impotent moral busybody threatened his livelihood (in private messages.) I believe most of it has been cleaned up.
81.
by srslack 3y ago
It's unfortunate that this guy was harassed for releasing these uncensored models. It's pretty ironic, for people who are supposedly so concerned about "alignment" and "morality" to threaten others. "Align
82.
by srslack 3y ago
If consciousness somehow (not saying this seriously, and ignoring that this article is bullshit) emerges out of the linear/non-linear regression machines, and there's any potential for "machiavellianism", than would thei
83.
by srslack 3y ago
Hawking's statement was made after the confirmation of the Higgs, and is still valid. A metastability vacuum event could be a problem (that's putting it lightly, hah) at high enough energies. It might have already happened, elsewh
84.
by srslack 3y ago
>Even ChatGPT is showing it can easily disobey orders. Or, maybe it's just bad at those particular text predictions, explicitly due to OpenAI's RLHF process? Maybe my Markov chain chatbots back in high school were in actuality
85.
by srslack 3y ago
GPT-4 can barely operate a real web browser (not the summarizing web browser crap that like langchain and auto-gpt provide) without fumbling. I know, because I make it use one. Also, auto-gpt has no guardrails to remove. It just runs prompt
86.
by srslack 3y ago
To be fair, I wasn't calling you a hypocrite. I was implying that the "journalists" who shovel shit, whose prospects of being replaced by the predictor is almost certain at this point, are hypocrites. I do enjoy a little scha
87.
by srslack 3y ago
>I simply don't see it, so to me it reads as propaganda from those powerful entities. Yes. It's called regulatory capture. Big business, and business with big business investment, want to be regulated, because they have the res
88.
by srslack 3y ago
That, if the market deems the value of a white collar to be less than the output of a text predictor, maybe you should "reskill" and "learn to code"? What's wrong with letting the market speak? Since apparently the
89.
by srslack 3y ago
>For example, many people reasonably reckon that this new technology will put a lot of white collar workers out of work. That didn't seem to be a problem when it happened to blue collars. In fact, you could say that it was deliberat
90.
by srslack 3y ago
Human actors have been doing the voice scams for a bit. No AI needed. It's easy to swindle people, especially senior citizens, who are reacting naively and ultimately emotionally to a good actor over a communication mechanism where hal

More ›