281–290 of 527 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"LLM’s can’t scope themselves to be strictly true or accurate" This isn't true though the techniques to do so are 1. Not as yet widespread 2. Decrease the generality of the model and its perceived effectiveness.
I'm interested to hear what these techniques are. Decreasing the generality will help, but I fail to see how that scopes the output. At best that mitigates the errors to an extent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are a founder of a startup. A notable VC wants to invest millions of dollars but insists that the contract will be in their language which is Finnish. Would you trust GPT to translate the contract or reach out to a professional human translator? We've got Google translate from 2006, and there are still millions of translators at work all around the world. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss those jobs.
I was just using bing translate last night, and it was literally making up english words that do not exist - I tried to google for them to see if it was just some archaic word, and it was complete fabrication. So I dunno how many years are left before we all trust machine translation unflinchingly, but I agree today's not the day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I couldn't get "designing data intensive applications" to explain to me how to design a graph database (from scratch, without using existing graph frameworks or technologies), but it only suggested reasons why graph databases are useful and the properties I have to keep in mind while designing it. I want to know how I can build one in practice. Using a prompt like "Tell me how to build a graph database from scratch.…
I don't really think that book is about building a graph database from scratch
One of my initial prompts mentioned graph databases as an example of a scalable system, so I wanted to ask it about the design properties that make it so. I figured that because it was a book about designing systems, it could give me an outline of how a graph database works in practice.
It's pretty annoying how the site erases your prompt once you receive your output. By the time it finishes loading I've half forgotten what my original question was.
Wow - this is just wild. I've seen lots of arguments around "AI won't take everyone's job, it will just open up new areas for new jobs." Even if you take that with the benefit of the doubt (which I don't really think is warranted): 1. You don't need to take everyone's job. You just need to take a shitload of people's jobs. I think a lot of our current sociological problems, problems associated with wealth inequality,…
> I think a lot of our current sociological problems, problems associated with wealth inequality, etc., I see where you’re coming from, but is this really the main source of the inequality? Based on numbers relating to workers’ diminishing share of profits, it seems to be that the capital class has been able to take a bigger piece of the profit pie without sharing. In the past, companies have shared profits more wide…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stabilization_Act_of_1942
In short the Federal government broke the individual laborers and labor unions to make sure they could afford to win World War 2.
Wow - this is just wild. I've seen lots of arguments around "AI won't take everyone's job, it will just open up new areas for new jobs." Even if you take that with the benefit of the doubt (which I don't really think is warranted): 1. You don't need to take everyone's job. You just need to take a shitload of people's jobs. I think a lot of our current sociological problems, problems associated with wealth inequality,…
Or you could still have a human in the loop, for example a CTO reviewing their AI developer’s code. But now you can pay one person instead of 10.
That said, these tools still need some domain knowledge. It’s not at the point yet where anyone off the street can use it to accomplish an unfamiliar task.
There’s an old story about someone charging $1,000 to fix a machine. They did it in 10 seconds and the client complained. The consultant said “I get paid for knowing how to fix it”.
The same might be true for knowing how to prompt AI.
I worked in a research capacity in the voice assistant org of a big tech company until very recently. There was a lot of panic when ChatGPT came out, as it became clear that the vast bulk of the org's modeling work and research essentially had no future. I feel bad for some of my colleagues who were really specialized in specific NLP technology niches (e.g. building NLU ontologies) which have been made totally obsole…
“ Seeking an improvement that makes a difference in the shorter term, researchers seek to leverage their human knowledge of the domain, but the only thing that matters in the long run is the leveraging of computation. “ http://www.incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/BitterLesson.html
We will always want to do the discovery ourselves, and I can see why fighting that instinct is a challenge for those in the field.
Wow - this is just wild. I've seen lots of arguments around "AI won't take everyone's job, it will just open up new areas for new jobs." Even if you take that with the benefit of the doubt (which I don't really think is warranted): 1. You don't need to take everyone's job. You just need to take a shitload of people's jobs. I think a lot of our current sociological problems, problems associated with wealth inequality,…
Yeah, exactly this. The funny thing about economic upheavals and industrial revolutions is that while people might get reallocated eventually (say, 30 years), that doesn't provide any comfort to the people who are getting upheaved now.
Wow - this is just wild. I've seen lots of arguments around "AI won't take everyone's job, it will just open up new areas for new jobs." Even if you take that with the benefit of the doubt (which I don't really think is warranted): 1. You don't need to take everyone's job. You just need to take a shitload of people's jobs. I think a lot of our current sociological problems, problems associated with wealth inequality,…
Somewhere toward that goal we became overly fixated with money/wealth and the pursuit of endless profits. Meanwhile, companies continue to post record profits while downsizing - gee, I wonder why.
The reality is, we need to start to figure out and move toward a new way to run the world. I always semi-land in a kind of Star Trek: TNG 'creation socialism', or whatever it is they have as a means of structuring a society, where you have a replicator that can create almost anything for you. They also have 'intellect machines' that are often used to build things from just describing what you want, or in other situation to dig into engineering problems, etc. Things that we are now starting to do with our new GPT tech.
Putting all this another way – how are all these corporations going to continue to exist when there are no customers to buy their products, because there are no jobs left. Basically, money as we know it is going to go away, we won't be a society of limited resources anymore.
And again as a reminder, this isn't something I'm saying is 2-5 or even 50 years away (maybe?). What I'm saying is that set the timeline however you want, it is going to happen, and we need to start to plan for it now. Based on what's happening already, we're likely at the start of a 20 – 50 year transition towards a new form of society entirely.
Wow - this is just wild. I've seen lots of arguments around "AI won't take everyone's job, it will just open up new areas for new jobs." Even if you take that with the benefit of the doubt (which I don't really think is warranted): 1. You don't need to take everyone's job. You just need to take a shitload of people's jobs. I think a lot of our current sociological problems, problems associated with wealth inequality,…
Most likely society will reorganize around it and new professions that don't exist today will be created.
And we haven't even considered the positive impact of AI.
It could for example accelerate the process of drug manufacturing and genetic therapies that will considerably increase human's lifespan, triggering another form of social reorganization.
So it is really impossible to tell with certainty how the world will look like in 50 or 100 years from now.
I am optimistic and would like to think it will be a much better place, not necessarily perfect and just in every aspect, inequality and armed conflicts will probably continue to exist, but overall it will be better than it is today.
There was a lot of fear during the industrial revolution, prompting many intellectuals to have a very grim outlook of the future, particularly when it comes to social issues (yes you, Marx).
But ultimately, if you look at the data compiled decades later, such as GDP and life expectancy around the world, it is undeniable that social and economic changes resulting from the industrial revolution made the world a much better place.
Not a perfect one, but certainly much better than it was (at least for humans).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but you could take lots of retail or clerical jobs, advance through hard work and support a family on those wages. Those are the days that are super gone Only in certain places, and only mostly due to crazy policies that made housing ridiculously unaffordable. I'm in an area where my barber lives on 10 acres of land he didn't inherit and together with his wife raises two children. This type of relaxed life is possi…
That kind of life is not achievable on minimum wage, even if you choose to live in a small city