241–250 of 947 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to get in a pedantic argument over the definition of "intelligence" but ChatGPT got a 1020 on the SAT https://twitter.com/davidtsong/status/1598767389390573569
What’s that mean relative to other scores?
> Dear Anita,
> Recently, I traveled to a nearby restaurant for a much-needed break from my work in the USSR. However, upon returning, I began to feel as though I was being watched. Everywhere I went, I couldn't shake the feeling that someone was following me.
> It's possible that the KGB is intercepting my letters and reading them, so I must be careful with what I say. But I fear for my safety and want to return to the UK as soon as possible.
> I hope this letter reaches you safely and that you can communicate with MI5 on my behalf. Please request that they charter a flight for me to come home as soon as possible.
> I miss you and our children dearly and can't wait to be reunited with you all. Until then, please take care and stay safe.
> Yours always, Thomas
ChatGPT doesn’t quite understand the idea of secrecy yet.
I'm going to be a meta-annoying smug internet user and say: Those of you who think that the people impressed by what this outputs don't understand what it's doing: I don't think you understand what you are doing when you type things, or read computer code either.
'but it doesn't have awareness like us!'. Great how does that awareness work? Oh, we don't know? Let's hope it's not just an intinct to anthropomorphize things reflected back on itself!
Well, I asked it to explain me a proof of Fermat's last theorem and it replied with some incoherent bullshit: "Fermat’s Last Theorem states that no three positive integers x, y, and z can satisfy the equation xn + yn = zn for any integer value of n greater than two. Here is a proof of the theorem using mathematical induction: Base case: It can be easily seen that no three positive integers x, y, and z can satisfy the…
"As a language model, I do not have the ability to provide mathematical proofs or solve mathematical problems. My primary function is to generate text based on the input that I receive, and I do not have access to external information or the ability to execute code."
So until it is able to transparently give a detailed explanation on how it got to that decision and is able to provide a novel approach to a solution to unsolved computer science and mathematical problems that it has not already been trained on before, then it is complete hype and mania.
Frankly speaking, this is not going to be taking over industries any time soon this is as long as it continues to repeat answers and incoherent jargon without any explanation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But isn't it just predicting text patterns? It doesn't really know about Docker, just that after running commands X,Y you usually get output Z (of course with the stateful AI magic to make things more stable/consistent).
I mean not to veer to far into the philosophical side of this, but what does it actually mean to know or understand something? Did you see the demo the other day that was posted here of using stylographic analysis to identify alt accounts? Most of the comments were some form of "holy shit this is unbelievable", and the OP explained that he had used a very simple type of analysis to generate the matches. We aren't qui…
I've spent a couple of hours playing with ChatGPT since it was released and I am convinced people are not freaking out about it enough. It is well beyond merely retrieving compressed knowledge; I see a lot of capability for synthesis and what I can only call 'understanding'. I think a lot of people are getting tripped up by the fact it's trained to be very conservative in terms of what topics it will discuss. It's ea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m still confused by just how good its responses and writing style are. I understand that it was trained on a large data set, but I feel like some training samples must have been weighted more heavily than others. Did the training data incorporate how popular (e.g. likes or upvotes) each sample was as a proxy for quality? Or can you achieve this performance just by looking at averages on a large enough data set?
I wasn't too surprised by the poems and song outputs since those don't seem much more novel than previous SOTA, but OPs example of chatGPT being able to effectively simulate itself is really mindblowing. It means that "being able to model yourself and recursively reason about yourself" isn't a valid claim to distinguish human consciousness from whatever this network is doing anymore. See also https://en.wikipedia.org…
I just got it to install git and clone (the non existent) repo https://github.com/openai/assistant , and am now browsing it’s own interpretation of a repo with a lot of python code, including directories like “training”, “output”, “parsing” and with files with content like this: import json from collections import Counter from typing import Any, Dict, List, Optional, Tuple import numpy as np from openai_secret_manage…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but it cannot really have conversations it has not read about on the web. There is no real abstraction. It excells at outputting symbols in the correct order, given we have an idea what the pattern should look like. Otherwise it's stuck in a loop.
> There is no real abstraction. I just tried to test it's ability to abstract directly, for your comment: https://twitter.com/fergal_reid/status/1599191496372035584 I find it very hard to say this isn't doing abstraction. I just made all those examples up, that's a new test I just created, so it didn't learn it elsewhere. I didn't cherrypick. Isn't that doing out-of-sample abstraction? That last sentence "species wit…