11–20 of 57 posts
I would guess a lot of things scare this guy. He's a clickbait youtuber who does simple stuff and tries to make it sound profound.
I am an AI researcher, and I wholeheartedly agree with Tom here. I love AI, I love designing and training models and seeing all the amazing things they can do. But I would be lying if I said I wasn't scared. Like Tom, I have no idea where on the sigmoid curve we are, but I personally believe we're very near the beginning. I thought that becoming a practitioner in this field would make me less susceptible to making bi…
I think we're right before the hockey stick, just like the days of Napster.
To use another analogy - The Industrial Revolution didn't make it possible to make screws, it made it possible to make a box of screws that you could sell for a dollar. Previously it took a skilled craftsman and time. No two were alike, and they tended to be individually stamped with a number so you could unscrew/rescrew things when you took something apart.
Someone in 1810 wouldn't want to buy cheap screws, the way forward would be able to own a lathe, planer, and make your own screws, and other hardware.
Similarly, my strategy right now is to try to find stuff I can use on my own computer, not something that Google can kill on a whim.
I've played with Stable-diffusion-ui, and found that for me, the main use would be to transform a rough (VERY rough) sketch of something into well illustrated picture.
I'll start playing with ChatGPT and the like when I can run them on my own hardware.
I am an AI researcher, and I wholeheartedly agree with Tom here. I love AI, I love designing and training models and seeing all the amazing things they can do. But I would be lying if I said I wasn't scared. Like Tom, I have no idea where on the sigmoid curve we are, but I personally believe we're very near the beginning. I thought that becoming a practitioner in this field would make me less susceptible to making bi…
There's nothing intelligent in ChatGPT, it's just a text generator on steroids, web spammers have been using this sort of tools for years. It cannot generate new ideas, at the end it just regurgitates content
I don't find very much substance in this argument, given how impossible it is to consistently define "new" and "idea" in this context. At the end of the day, ChatGPT demonstrates that AI models are making real progress towards convincing mimicry of human behavior. How it does it is of no concern to me, what is concerning is the fact that it does it at all.
I am an AI researcher, and I wholeheartedly agree with Tom here. I love AI, I love designing and training models and seeing all the amazing things they can do. But I would be lying if I said I wasn't scared. Like Tom, I have no idea where on the sigmoid curve we are, but I personally believe we're very near the beginning. I thought that becoming a practitioner in this field would make me less susceptible to making bi…
There's nothing intelligent in ChatGPT, it's just a text generator on steroids, web spammers have been using this sort of tools for years. It cannot generate new ideas, at the end it just regurgitates content
«just a text generator on steroid » is meaningless unless you define what « on steroid» means. It might as well describe a novelist’s activity or a programmer.
The ability to understand enough of the relationship between words and their associated concepts in chatgpt is good enough to produce meaningful and sometimes correct answers to a huge number of questions. This is far beyond « random », and can easily be described as an « intelligent » capacity.
So, fellow HN users... where are we on the S curve? I think we're right before the hockey stick, just like the days of Napster. To use another analogy - The Industrial Revolution didn't make it possible to make screws, it made it possible to make a box of screws that you could sell for a dollar. Previously it took a skilled craftsman and time. No two were alike, and they tended to be individually stamped with a numbe…
So, fellow HN users... where are we on the S curve? I think we're right before the hockey stick, just like the days of Napster. To use another analogy - The Industrial Revolution didn't make it possible to make screws, it made it possible to make a box of screws that you could sell for a dollar. Previously it took a skilled craftsman and time. No two were alike, and they tended to be individually stamped with a numbe…
It seems closer to this: https://xkcd.com/605/
I'll concede there have been large breakthroughs, but to extrapolate from that there will be even larger breakthroughs (without a really solid account of why that would be) seems very sketchy. I get that the people who are trying to sell the idea to investors are pitching this line, but applying a modicum of critical thinking, that's relatively rarely how things work. Returns tend to diminish with the amount of effort put in, not exponentially increase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing intelligent in ChatGPT, it's just a text generator on steroids, web spammers have been using this sort of tools for years. It cannot generate new ideas, at the end it just regurgitates content
You sound like someone who has either never tried chatgpt, or someone who’s so scared of the consequences that it prefers to put its head in the sand. «just a text generator on steroid » is meaningless unless you define what « on steroid» means. It might as well describe a novelist’s activity or a programmer. The ability to understand enough of the relationship between words and their associated concepts in chatgpt i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing intelligent in ChatGPT, it's just a text generator on steroids, web spammers have been using this sort of tools for years. It cannot generate new ideas, at the end it just regurgitates content
> It cannot generate new ideas. I don't find very much substance in this argument, given how impossible it is to consistently define "new" and "idea" in this context. At the end of the day, ChatGPT demonstrates that AI models are making real progress towards convincing mimicry of human behavior. How it does it is of no concern to me, what is concerning is the fact that it does it at all.