Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

nabilalouani.substack.com

71–80 of 85 posts

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#71
I don't know how I feel about this article, especially around the definition of understanding.

I have two children under 6, and if you watch their learning patterns they follow a very much the same path, and mimicry is part of that. They learn the subject matter at hand through repetition, and that then build comprehension which is the basis for understanding.

I think ChatGPT has learnt and started to understand language based on the data given to it, it has built some understanding how language is structured as it is able to regurgitate language.

It has contextual understanding at some level and contextual awareness. One of the next logical questions would be, does it have intelligence and that I don't think is the case. It understanding is based on its understanding of the language.

I think the bike example is a great example, my son is learning to ride a bike. He has no understanding of balance as the article states, he has awareness of it, he knows he needs to peddle to move forward but he has no understanding of inertia, he has to steer but he has no understanding of physics, but he understands all of these components are required and he knows that via data "the experience of learning". I think it would be difficult without prompting to get him to explain his "understanding".

Now understanding is great, you can apply learned information and apply it to another subject. So we can use what we have learned from ridding a bike and apply it to a motorbike. I am unsure if this cross domain transfer of understanding is something which ChatGPT can do, but it does a great job of extrapolating data and apply it to learnt rules.

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#72

These articles are all the same. It's like complaining how the Ford Model T couldn't drive you to England in the early 20th century while ignoring how it would revolutionize cities and life within America. Whether you believe it's 'real' or not is irrelevant. It's here, it's useful and the world will not be the same as it was.

Language models have been around for a very long time. However, they were much smaller than today and were mainly used to check the fluency of a text, basically if a text was a problable text in English or in French for instance. These models were trained over words and had a huge problem with unknown words or spelling errors. They were used in translation models to check the quality of what was produced. In this sense, a language model might seem something ancient. However, if we take your analogy with a car, modern LM are to ancient LM what a plane is to a car. You still travel with it but it is a complete different beast. To say that these models are nothing new is a total travesti of reality. Transformer architectures have been around since 2017, a mere 6 years, but they have revolutionized the way LLM are trained and implemented. If you speak about language models without talking about transformer or attention, you are basically saying that a plane is the same as a car.

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#73

I'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.

Because at the end of the day its still a bunch of linear algebra optimized to predict the next “word” that would fit into a sentence. This is very evident because you can convince it of anything because it desperately needs the conversation to make sense.

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“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.

Because at the end of the day its still a bunch of linear algebra optimized to predict the next “word” that would fit into a sentence. This is very evident because you can convince it of anything because it desperately needs the conversation to make sense.

And why would mathematics not be a road to intelligence?

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#75

I'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,…

Well explained. The analogy is on point

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I saw this example on Twitter today which shows ChatGPT doesn't understand: Mike's mother had 4 kids; 3 of them are named Luis, Drake and Matilda. What is the name of the 4th kid? I'm sorry, but I don't have information about the fourth kid. The information you provided is that Mike's mother has 4 kids, and three of them are named Luis, Drake, and Matilda. However, the name of the fourth child is not specified in the…

I asked ChatGPT this same question and it said:

> Mike is the fourth child.

Is it training itself continuously?

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#78

These articles are all the same. It's like complaining how the Ford Model T couldn't drive you to England in the early 20th century while ignoring how it would revolutionize cities and life within America. Whether you believe it's 'real' or not is irrelevant. It's here, it's useful and the world will not be the same as it was.

How would LLM revolutionize everyday life?

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a riddle because the answer is plain to anyone who understands English. I'm not saying you don't but the answer is right there. I asked it a followup: The name of the 4th child is in the question Ah, I see! My apologies for missing that. In that case, the name of the fourth child is Mike.

I had to read it multiple times before I understood why it was a test of understanding. It is a riddle.

even if you classify it as riddle, you still need intelligence to "solve it", which is what is missing in LLM. the good answer you later got was probably prompt created by someone manually, to further feed the model.

did you need more data to solve the riddle ? rather more attention to what you read than more data, and that's the sole issue with AI/ML in current form.

Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI

#80

I'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.

Because general intelligence don't arise from statistical analysis of extremely large amount of data.

Think human child, or even adults. They don't know near the amount of data that ChatGPT has been trained on, yet react far better when they are put in a situation that they have never seen before.

Post reply on HN