Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Yann LeCun: ChatGPT is 'not particularly innovative'

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 190 posts

Re: Yann LeCun: ChatGPT is 'not particularly innovative'

#81

Post by rafaelero »

smoldesu wrote: post #25
cl42 wrote: post #12

It's amazing how many researchers underestimate the importance of UX and design. Personally, seeing non-technical people using prompts for the first time -- and getting results that make sense -- is so incredible. Their eyes light up, they are surprised, and they want to keep playing with it. Amazing! A sizeable part of the population just got access to an incredibly complex AI model and can play with it. What a coll…

Clarke's third law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Most people don't understand that ChatGPT has no idea what they're talking about. It lacks it's own thought and heuristic patterns, and only gives you the most-likely response to your prompt. People don't know that though, so they think the Mechanical Turk is actually playing chess. I mostly agree with the headline here. ChatG…

> Most people don't understand that ChatGPT has no idea what they're talking about.

I wonder why people keep saying this. Is it some type of psychological defense to future AI displacement?

Re: Yann LeCun: ChatGPT is 'not particularly innovative'

#83

Post by __seka__ »

Sometimes the innovation lies within the simple fact of how well known things are combined in order to create (good) products.

"Not particularly innovative" is not really of concern. Besides OpenAI most likely received the media attention they wanted.

Looking forward to the products Meta is going to release soon.

Re: Yann LeCun: ChatGPT is 'not particularly innovative'

#85

Post by cl42 »

random3 wrote: post #72
cl42 wrote: post #12

It's amazing how many researchers underestimate the importance of UX and design. Personally, seeing non-technical people using prompts for the first time -- and getting results that make sense -- is so incredible. Their eyes light up, they are surprised, and they want to keep playing with it. Amazing! A sizeable part of the population just got access to an incredibly complex AI model and can play with it. What a coll…

Researchers point of view is based on their area of research and that's fair and expected. Yann LeCun compares ChatGPT in the context of the related research. Imagine a ChatGPT equivalent that memorizes many questions and does a brute force strategy for an answer. It may "look" magic, but there's nothing magic about it. We all accepted that this is the case with Blue Gene - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue_(ch…

OK, I'll defend the research, too.

OpenAI's really interesting approach to GPT was to scale the size of the underlying neural network. They noticed that the performance of an LLM kept improving as the size of the network grew so they said, "Screw it, how about if we make it have 100+ billion parameters?"

Turns out they were right.

From a research perspective, I'd say this was a big risk and it turned out they were right -- bigger network = better performance.

Sure, it's not as beautiful as inventing a fundamentally new algorithm or approach to deep learning but it worked. Credit where it's due -- scaling training infrastructure + building a model that big was hard...

It's like saying SLS or Falcon Heavy are "just" bigger rockets. Sure, but that's still super hard, risky, and fundamentally new.

Re: Yann LeCun: ChatGPT is 'not particularly innovative'

#86

Post by hprotagonist »

rafaelero wrote: post #81
smoldesu wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clarke's third law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Most people don't understand that ChatGPT has no idea what they're talking about. It lacks it's own thought and heuristic patterns, and only gives you the most-likely response to your prompt. People don't know that though, so they think the Mechanical Turk is actually playing chess. I mostly agree with the headline here. ChatG…

> Most people don't understand that ChatGPT has no idea what they're talking about. I wonder why people keep saying this. Is it some type of psychological defense to future AI displacement?

maybe, but it's also just the fact of the matter.

Re: Yann LeCun: ChatGPT is 'not particularly innovative'

#87

Post by hbrn »

smoldesu wrote: post #25
cl42 wrote: post #12

It's amazing how many researchers underestimate the importance of UX and design. Personally, seeing non-technical people using prompts for the first time -- and getting results that make sense -- is so incredible. Their eyes light up, they are surprised, and they want to keep playing with it. Amazing! A sizeable part of the population just got access to an incredibly complex AI model and can play with it. What a coll…

Clarke's third law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Most people don't understand that ChatGPT has no idea what they're talking about. It lacks it's own thought and heuristic patterns, and only gives you the most-likely response to your prompt. People don't know that though, so they think the Mechanical Turk is actually playing chess. I mostly agree with the headline here. ChatG…

> ChatGPT has no idea what they're talking about. It lacks it's own thought and heuristic patterns, and only gives you the most-likely response to your prompt

Funny thing is, same could be said about lots of people. Try listening to any political debate.

Which leads me to believe that the thing that's missing from AI is the same thing that we miss in those political debates: ability to explain and justify your own thought process.

As long as AI is a blackbox, we won't consider it to be a real intelligence.

Re: Yann LeCun: ChatGPT is 'not particularly innovative'

#88

Post by lostmsu »

lofatdairy wrote: post #32

I mean, ChatGPT isn't even innovative for OpenAI's team. In terms of raw language capabilities it's not much more effective as GPT-3, which passed the HN Turing test almost a year before. Some of the credit goes to the fact that Dall-E 2 got everyone looking at OpenAI (and wrt Dall-E I'm personally not aware of any comparable work done anywhere else), a lot of the credit goes to the fact that OpenAI was willing to pu…

> In terms of raw language capabilities it's not much more effective as GPT-3, which passed the HN Turing test almost a year before.

No, its ability to follow instructions is much better than GPT-3.

Re: Yann LeCun: ChatGPT is 'not particularly innovative'

#90

Post by browningstreet »

rockemsockem wrote: post #9

A tweet isn't worth a news article. Geeze.

That seems to be a lot of news articles these days.

I'm not particularly excited by ChatGPT, but the mercenary in me is impressed at the investment from MS it generated. From a business perspective, it accomplished "and profit!". Whether it pays dividends or reaches a richer/more-sophisticated milestone is to be seen.

Personally, I think it'll muddy and flood the "bullshit" & truthiness layer pervading news, social media, auto-generated Youtube content and blogs, our digitally mediated life, etc. It's essentially the next level "bot", and those aren't held in high regard, as effective as they are. Ultimately, they're noise.

I'll go a step further: ChatGPT feels more like VR & crypto than it does.. say, cloud.

Post reply on HN