41–50 of 66 posts
I clicked on the article hoping to find information on potential new cognitive skills humans will need to learn to differentiate Large Language Model (LLM) hallucinated facts from real facts, but unfortunately the article doesn't touch upon this. Reading the comments it seems likely that the article is itself LLM-generated blogspam, in which case it won't be aware of the potential for hallucinated facts. I was thinki…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try to ask your friends some very difficult question, like "what is the definition of woman?". I am saying that current education does not give people tools to use LLM and AI. They will spend most of time on problems like "not being racist" or "looking for systemic bias". Others without this baggage will run circles around them, and eat their lunch.
Wasn't that one of Socrates' early examples of definitions not being as simple as they seem?
This is similar to the moral panic around Google and Wikipedia. No, people won't stop learning because of chatgpt. Studying and developing critical thinking is more important than ever before. What people miss when they babble stuff like "math is useless" or "literature is useless" or "history is useless" is that those things are not important by themselves, they are important because you are learning models and tool…
> No, people won't stop learning because of chatgpt. Actually it’s the opposite. People will start learning more, because of ChatGPT. Since I started using ChatGPT I am learning new things on a daily basis, about philosophy, about history, about computer sciences, about algorithms, about all sorts of things. It’s a lot of fun diving into subjects in a conversational way, with a „teacher“ by my side who never gets tir…
Take facts as though they were from an undergrad in the subject pontificating after a few beers.
Alternate hypothesis: Life on this planet has evolved from primitive organisms whose only goal is to propagate through spacetime (in time = survive, in space = reproduce), as this is the de facto only initial goal you may encounter serendipitously, when the trait we judge is... in fact propagation though spacetime (i.e. to exist, you need to know how to keep existing). In the quest of adapting better to our environme…
Since the start of humanity, we made tools to make things easier for us, we don't fish with our hands anymore for a reason.
I clicked on the article hoping to find information on potential new cognitive skills humans will need to learn to differentiate Large Language Model (LLM) hallucinated facts from real facts, but unfortunately the article doesn't touch upon this. Reading the comments it seems likely that the article is itself LLM-generated blogspam, in which case it won't be aware of the potential for hallucinated facts. I was thinki…
I can write a lot of words saying why this blogspam is not backed by actual fact. But a simple demonstration is in order: please go to bing chat and search for "West Ham United latest result". The normal search (either Bing or Google) will give you the failfest against Brighton. While Bing Chat will confidently say "I’m sorry, but I couldn’t find any information about the latest game result for West Ham United". Here…
They are up against traditional web search which has about a 30 year head start. There is a dissonance where some seem to think these aren't useful yet I see people getting a ton of use out of them.
Alternate hypothesis: Life on this planet has evolved from primitive organisms whose only goal is to propagate through spacetime (in time = survive, in space = reproduce), as this is the de facto only initial goal you may encounter serendipitously, when the trait we judge is... in fact propagation though spacetime (i.e. to exist, you need to know how to keep existing). In the quest of adapting better to our environme…
This doesn't make sense when applied to current technology. Can you say that because we made cars we didn't develop to run faster? And because we have hospitals, genes that aren't optimal for a climate still exist? Since the start of humanity, we made tools to make things easier for us, we don't fish with our hands anymore for a reason.
Cognition however is what defines our very soul. Being human is intricately linked with it in a way that the physical is not. Stephen Hawkings could be an example of that.
Ceding cognition presents a very real and existential problem for humans. What’s left? We have literally no other defining qualities.
About your examples: people are more obese than ever and cars certainly don’t help. Only the elite few have the resources to focus on something as useless as running fast. “We” as a society cannot run fast(er) and I’ll indeed argue that this ability decreased because of technology. Not that I particularly care about running.
I clicked on the article hoping to find information on potential new cognitive skills humans will need to learn to differentiate Large Language Model (LLM) hallucinated facts from real facts, but unfortunately the article doesn't touch upon this. Reading the comments it seems likely that the article is itself LLM-generated blogspam, in which case it won't be aware of the potential for hallucinated facts. I was thinki…
Perhaps instead of using the word hallucination we could use average-context. When the LLM doesn't have enough information it computes some average of the information available in the wrapping context, so hallucination is some form of wrong result because of computing averages in a context. But the context could also be wrong.
I clicked on the article hoping to find information on potential new cognitive skills humans will need to learn to differentiate Large Language Model (LLM) hallucinated facts from real facts, but unfortunately the article doesn't touch upon this. Reading the comments it seems likely that the article is itself LLM-generated blogspam, in which case it won't be aware of the potential for hallucinated facts. I was thinki…
We have the same sources for truth we’ve always had. Trusted sources. Trusted sources for textbooks, articles, etc..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No, people won't stop learning because of chatgpt. Actually it’s the opposite. People will start learning more, because of ChatGPT. Since I started using ChatGPT I am learning new things on a daily basis, about philosophy, about history, about computer sciences, about algorithms, about all sorts of things. It’s a lot of fun diving into subjects in a conversational way, with a „teacher“ by my side who never gets tir…
Are you checking it's answering your questions correctly?