> ChatGPT, summarize the article
No true Scotsman. Flamebait
ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
21–30 of 85 posts
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#22> Just like clients have an edge over waiters, OpenAI’s CEO had an edge over his listeners — and what he did was take every single one of them for a fool.
It's funny that the author writes about Sam taking people for fools and then treats his readers as fools
> Large Language Models don’t understand anything
I'm not sure who the intended audience for this is, but I'm fairly certain HN readers don't think LLMs "understand" anything
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#23I've find two groups of people on this subject, first one has taken a graduate level stat course and/or ML course, and may have work experience in machine learning/data science. The latter camp is more numerous and did not do those things. The latter group are far more hyped about ChatGPT et al, despite explanation by the first group. Don't get me wrong, ChatGPT is very exciting, just not in the way it is frequently…
> first one has taken a graduate level stat course and/or ML course, and may have work experience in machine learning/data science I think it's just a few people getting salty because they understand "how it works" but don't understand "why is getting popular". So they start to shout from their ivory tower without realising the tectonic shift under way. Sort of, you know how to build a stupid mobile video/photo app,…
I'm also very excited about how useful it is, after years of mostly academic papers and poor industrial attempt to utilize it, there's finally something that truly showed the power of the LLM model to the masses. It's the iPhone 4 of language models.
But iPhone 4 isn't fusion energy. It's incredibly useful and a tectonic shift in the cellphone industry, but it's not producing energy. The analogy might sound completely insane, but that's how different machine learning of today and general intelligence is.
This will replace humans in certain jobs - just like McDonald's touch order machines and 100000 other times when a machine of either digital or mechanical contraption replaces humans in history. This is not however the beginning of singularity where the AI gets a mind of its own and start a symbiotic or adversarial relationship with human civilization, this isn't even a step in that direction, this is closer to the internet or wikipedia than that.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#24[deleted]
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#25> Models don’t understand anything Are people really so unaware of themselves? What is understanding? I'm not going to even attempt to define that, but I will posit that the only way we have of verifying understanding, regardless of what definition you use, is validating the correct output for a given input. For instance, when we teach children, we validate their understanding by giving them a test. Are we able to lo…
that would mean a gear has understanding of torque?
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#26I've find two groups of people on this subject, first one has taken a graduate level stat course and/or ML course, and may have work experience in machine learning/data science. The latter camp is more numerous and did not do those things. The latter group are far more hyped about ChatGPT et al, despite explanation by the first group. Don't get me wrong, ChatGPT is very exciting, just not in the way it is frequently…
I think there's a further split between "academic experience" and "real world experience". I'm mostly a developer to be honest, but my job title is technically "data scientist". From my experience most stuff I see is not a math problem, it's a data problem. You want to optimize $thing? Well, you'll need a pipeline to fetch the necessary data and have them ready on demand, and that's actually harder than modeling. Thi…
Indeed, I consider ChatGPT to be extremely impressive on an engineering perspective. The data science team I've observed have a difficult time to bridge science and engineering, it's hard to find someone proficient in both, despite all being very smart people.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#27People who can’t understand ChatGPT hype would have not used calculators when they came out on the grounds they didn’t understand mathematical proofs.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#28> Just like clients have an edge over waiters, OpenAI’s CEO had an edge over his listeners — and what he did was take every single one of them for a fool. It's funny that the author writes about Sam taking people for fools and then treats his readers as fools > Large Language Models don’t understand anything I'm not sure who the intended audience for this is, but I'm fairly certain HN readers don't think LLMs "unders…
I do! So long as we don’t appeal to consciousness as the basis for understanding but measure it with benchmarks, LLMs understand many things.
Maetschke, S., Iraola, D. M., Barnard, P., Shafiei Bavani, E., Zhong, P., Xu, Y., & Yepes, A. J. (2021). Understanding in artificial intelligence. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.06573.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#29People who can’t understand ChatGPT hype would have not used calculators when they came out on the grounds they didn’t understand mathematical proofs.
like the high school teacher who insisted multiplication be done with a slide rule?
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#30I've find two groups of people on this subject, first one has taken a graduate level stat course and/or ML course, and may have work experience in machine learning/data science. The latter camp is more numerous and did not do those things. The latter group are far more hyped about ChatGPT et al, despite explanation by the first group. Don't get me wrong, ChatGPT is very exciting, just not in the way it is frequently…
“development on this model will not lead to General Intelligence, which is not a data training/stat problem altogether”
Why is everyone so damn sure about this? Not to pick on you—I’ve read so many self-backpatting comments that feel the need to reassuringly say something like: “we all know this isn’t AGI and couldn’t possibly be and won’t lead to it.”
I don’t think this is so clear cut.