721–730 of 768 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
And execs will get even bigger bonuses, share holders get more dividends! Everybody wins!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironic given yours and others emphasis on my choosing "chatbot" to summarise llms as a reason to dismiss my comment, along with the rest of the pedantry. The upstream post dismissed / insulted the person for questioning value, which was what I called out. If you really had wanted to get into the "HN rules" game, you could at least have cited "don't be snarky"
> dismissed / insulted the person That wasn't even remotely my goal and I'm disappointed that my choice of words made it seem like it was. I purposefully added quotes to the word 'real' in my comment since any business is a real business and made it clear it was an assumption, not a fact. It's just that many tech workers often haven't worked outside of tech and therefore are blind to issues outside of the tech world,…
Translation: “Real” businesses sort of make their own gravity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have no particular insight into this either way, but I find it pretty hard to believe that OpenAI has more scaling capability than Google.
It's not just about hardware, it's about the software infrastructure to go with it. Other than OpenAI most researchers weren't interested in "merely" scaling things up because that was/is seen as simple engineering, unworthy of the great minds who dream up new algorithms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The level of denial people are willing to sink into regarding how good GPT-4 is compared to everything else is truly crazy. Not a single other project is an order of magnitude close to the quantitative and qualitative (actual experiential results, not just benchmarks) results that GPT-4 brings.
I feel that there’s significant insecurity among a lot of coders about GPT-4. A lot of them are ignoring the pace of improvement and highlighting the few off chances where it gets things wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I’ve worked in Tesla Autopilot before and saw it hit a mannequin because we never had mannequin in our dataset before ( we might have had it in the data but it was not a part of our ontology for the network to predict). Incredible. To be clear, your group and the company you work for saw fit to release your beta-quality autopilot onto public roads, as it was hitting human-looking objects in your test labs. Is that…
There’s too much insanity over building new tech these days, and I find a lot of hate directed on Autopilot, to stem from hate directed on Elon. Let’s go over the basics for Autopilot: 1. It costs thousands of dollars a year + 15k one time and it’s very easy to get banned from autopilot for life. They have a 3 strike rule + 1000 miles driven on your Tesla with a good safety before you’re allowed to access autopilot 2…
> In essence, this is not tech that is being used by regular people who have a chance of misusing it.
Now this is true in one sense – people who can't afford a Tesla and then aren't willing to spent an additional $15k on a piece of software, which has (many, many, many) times been described in a highly optimistic to the point of not having a very strict correlation with material reality way by the company's CEO, cannot use the software to drive in a car – and very false in another: _what if someone else's Tesla crashes into me_?
> while Tesla can keep iterating step by step
I could be wrong (this is a genuine statement, please don't take it as a passive aggressive one, it's not intended that way) but doesn't this rely on Tesla first finding a failure, then diagnosing a symptom, writing a fix, etc. The fact is though that this initial failure might be one of several crashes which have occured in a Tesla on AutoPilot, which isn't great?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Autopilot is advanced cruise control, apart from regulatory authorities saying it’s safe compared to competitors, Tesla releases quarterly safety reports since 2019 counting the incidents with Autopilot. So what did you do to fix the issue? Why did a second person die in the same exact way as the first person after 3 years? Were you working on the fix at all? Or did you do nothing? Just admit it if you did nothing…
I feel like I’m repeating myself to your constant emotional attacks of trying to make me feel guilt for 2016/ 2019 case so let me try to end it with: you’re right about one thing, AP is similar to other tech out there, it is cruise control with some extra features. If you think it is ethically wrong to put AP in the public, then every car since 2005 at least are a moral hazard, if you believe that fine I don’t. Cruis…
What concerns me is that even if this is technically true (I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll assume it's correct), it is not marketed this way. First the fact that it's called "AutoPilot" rather than something like cruise control or super cruise or lane assist, etc, or whatever other car manufacturers call their systems and second the misleading statements made by Tesla executives about how FSD is "imminent" and will be available soon.
From my perspective it’s just _confusing_ to work in AI right now. We have some massive models that are doing some really neat stuff, and apparently hundreds of millions of people are using them—but I keep wondering: to do _what_, exactly? I’m not asking what the models can do, I’m asking what people want the models to do every day, all the time. I’ve been shown some neat pictures people made that they thought were c…
Most of the people asking the question "to do _what_, exactly" seem to have not much of a "knowledge worker" experience. Every non-tech person I showed GPT4 to was after a few tests immediately using it to speed up parts of their daily work. Most impactful is how it destroys the blank page/getting started barrier, second how easy it is to substantially change/adapt/refocus produced work. It is like having an incredib…
This is the killer feature of GPT for me. I'm very, very good at optimizing and solving problems within specific domains, but terrible at picking a direction with no boundaries. (Pick a theme for a costume party and I'll have the most interesting costume. Throw a Halloween party and I'll show up in jeans and a t-shirt.)
I recently wanted to submit a conference talk, but wasn't sure where to start. I gave ChatGPT a list of possible topics and some general guidance about what I thought was interesting and asked it to suggest topics. I picked one from its list and asked for tweaks, then "discussed" with ChatGPT for a few more rounds until I had a very clear idea of what the talk would be.
I don't feel like that's cheating. I'm still going to create and give the talk myself. But if I had to come up with the topic and abstract on my own with only a blank sheet of paper to start with, I'd never have submitted it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s mostly different because they crippled the public version for now: no internet access, everything is done in one pass. In our mind we get an idea, we inspect it, we try different variations, we simulate how it will be perceive(consciousness). In this way we iterate before putting the information out. This is not difficult and is getting added on to it externally. Chat GPT is just to get us used to the id…
This is pure speculation, in a very implausible direction.
But I think they are mostly pointless as OpenAI is so far ahead of everyone external it’s not even funny. Most externals things with the API will be obsolete in a few months.
They had GPT4 6 months ago or more! They have access to the full model without crippling. They (for sure) have larger, more powerful models that are not cost effective/safe to release to the public.
Now they have a new data flyweel with people asking millions of questions daily.
Put your speculation hat on and listen attentively to the interviews of Sam Altman and Ilya Sutskever.
You will see were their minds go: UBI, safety, world disruption, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of the people who do have the wealth have been talking about UBI. Not out of the kindness of their heart, but because they understand that a world in which billions of people suddenly become "economically redundant" is also the world in which their mansions will burn, some quite possibly with their owners inside. Now, these guys mostly propose the "bare minimum" kind - effectively, just enough to prevent this sc…
> try to arrange for a safe landing instead. That would be nice. I sincerely hope that we can swing that. I just don't see a realistic path for it. And almost everything that I've been hearing the enthusiasts say just makes everything seem more hopeless. But I'm very much hoping that I'm wrong. At this point, hoping is the only thing I have the power to do.
So, regardless of one's ethics and political philosophy, we have a very strong collective interest as an economic class to prevent this scenario. Most of us don't have any more direct political power than your average voter, but we can throw more money at the politicians. In my experience, this doesn't help one bit with "wedge issues", but this all is so new that nobody has managed to weaponize it across political lines just yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. For my job maintaining real-time models with high business value to be disrupted by a chatbot, an LLM would have to be able to plug into our entire data ecosystem and yield insights in realtime. The backend engineering work required to facilitate this will be immense, and if the answer to that is "an LLM will create a new backend data architecture required to support the front-end prompt systems", then... wel…
Isn't this as straightforward as semantic search over an embedded corpus ? Unless i'm missing something, i don't think the backend engineering would take much