Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It might catch the tumor in 99.9999% of cases, better than any human doctor. But missing a malignant tumor 0.0001% of the time is unacceptable, because it spikes the hospital's malpractice costs. So every single scan still has to be reviewed manually by a doctor first, then by the AI as a fallback. I find it hard to believe human doctors miss malignant tumors in less than 1 out of every 10 million cases.
The point is that it may miss a tumor obvious to a human doctor.
GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
141–150 of 261 posts
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#142This is obviously very cool, but at this point — who knows what I’ll say in a year — my concern with these LLMs is that they’re in the uncanny valley. Here’s one passing a very difficult test. Amazing! Now, rely on it to build a nuclear doohickey for a power station or a multi-billion dollar device for CERN or anything really and, well, no. So humans still have to check the output, and now we’re in that situation whe…
How is this any different from using other technology, e.g. a calculator or a power tool? Or a manager and the output of their ICs? Obviously the scope of what's possible is different but _any_ craftsman using _any_ tool will only be as good as what they verify themselves.
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#143This is obviously very cool, but at this point — who knows what I’ll say in a year — my concern with these LLMs is that they’re in the uncanny valley. Here’s one passing a very difficult test. Amazing! Now, rely on it to build a nuclear doohickey for a power station or a multi-billion dollar device for CERN or anything really and, well, no. So humans still have to check the output, and now we’re in that situation whe…
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#144This is obviously very cool, but at this point — who knows what I’ll say in a year — my concern with these LLMs is that they’re in the uncanny valley. Here’s one passing a very difficult test. Amazing! Now, rely on it to build a nuclear doohickey for a power station or a multi-billion dollar device for CERN or anything really and, well, no. So humans still have to check the output, and now we’re in that situation whe…
How is this any different from using other technology, e.g. a calculator or a power tool? Or a manager and the output of their ICs? Obviously the scope of what's possible is different but _any_ craftsman using _any_ tool will only be as good as what they verify themselves.
These tools aren't replacements for knowledge and experience (which is the narrative that is constantly pushed), they bionic enhancements.
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
I truly pity you for thinking that learning a foreign language is a redundant exercise because of machine translation. And besides, though machines may perform well on menus and tax returns, I hardly think them on the cusp of emitting fine translations of great poems or novels.
Bilingual/Multilingual LLMs are human level translators more or less. The only way you can think "not on the cusp" is if you haven't actually used GPT-4 for translation. Use it and you'll be set straight pretty quickly.
-------
The tale I'm about to unfold commenced with a mysterious handwriting on an envelope. Within the pen strokes that outlined my name and the address of the Fossil Review, a publication I was associated with and where the letter had been forwarded from, there was an intriguing fusion of intensity and tenderness. As I speculated about the possible sender and message contents, a faint yet compelling sensation stirred within me, akin to a stone disrupting a tranquil frog pond. An unspoken realization surfaced, acknowledging the stagnancy of my life as of late. Upon opening the letter, I couldn't ascertain whether it felt like a revitalizing burst of fresh air or an unwelcome chilly breeze.
In the same brisk and flowing handwriting, the message was conveyed without pause: Sir, I have perused your article on Mount Analogue. Up until now, I considered myself the sole believer in its existence. Presently, we are a pair; tomorrow, perhaps a group of ten or more, and then we can launch our expedition. It is essential that we establish contact promptly. Kindly phone me at one of the numbers provided below at your earliest convenience. I eagerly anticipate your call.
--------
My story begins with some unfamiliar handwriting on an envelope. On it was written only my name and the address of the Revue des Fossiles, to which I had contributed and from which the letter had been forwarded. Yet those few penstrokes conveyed a shifting blend of violence and gentleness. Beneath my curiosity about the possible sender and contents of the letter, a vague but powerful presentiment evoked in me the image of 'a pebble in the mill-pond'. And from deep within me, like a bubble, rose the admission that my life had become all too stagnant lately. Thus, when opened the letter, I could not be sure whether it affected me like a breath of fresh air or like a disagreeable draught. In what seemed a single movement, the same fluent hand had written as follows:
Sir: I have read your article on Mount Analogue. Until now I had believed myself the only person convinced of its existence. Today there are two of us, tomorrow there will be ten, perhaps more, and we can attempt the expedition. We must meet without delay. Telephone me as soon as you can at one of the numbers below. I shall be expecting your call.
---------
Le commencement de tout ce que je vais raconter, ce fut une écriture inconnue sur une enveloppe. Il y avait dans ces traits de plume qui traçaient mon nom et l’adresse de la Revue des Fossiles, à laquelle je collaborais et d’où l’on m’avait fait suivre la lettre, un mélange tournant de violence et de douceur. Derrière les questions que je me formulais sur l’expéditeur et le contenu possibles du message, un vague mais puissant pressentiment m’évoquait l’image du « pavé dans la mare aux grenouilles ». Et du fond l’aveu montait comme une bulle que ma vie était devenue bien stagnante, ces derniers temps. Aussi, quand j’ouvris la lettre, je n’aurais su distinguer si elle me faisait l’effet d’une vivifiante bouffée d’air frais ou d’un désagréable courant d’air.
La même écriture, rapide et bien liée, disait tout d’un trait :
Monsieur, j’ai lu votre article sur le Mont Analogue. Je m’étais cru le seul, jusqu’ici, à être convaincu de son existence. Aujourd’hui, nous sommes deux, demain nous serons dix, plus peut-être, et on pourra tenter l’expédition. Il faut que nous prenions contact le plus vite possible. Téléphonez-moi dès que vous pourrez à un des numéros ci-dessous. Je vous attends.
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok so you haven't used it then. I don't care about your whack theories on what it can and can't do. I care about results. You're starting from weird assumptions that don't hold up on the capabilities of the model and then determining its abilities from there. It's extremely silly. Next time, use a product extensively for the specified task before you declare what it is and isn't good for. Literally, everything you've…
> Ok so you haven't used it then. Not only have I used it, I have made several accurate advance predictions about its behaviour and capabilities – some before GPT-4 was even published. I can model these models well enough to fool GPT output detectors into thinking that I am a GPT model. (Give me a writing task that GPT-4 can't be prompted to perform, and I can prove that last fact to you.) My theories aren't whack. P…
No you actually haven't. That's what i'm trying to tell you. Your advance prediction are not accurate. what you imagine to be problems are not problems. your limits are not limits. you say it can't make good abstract translations unless overfit to the translation. that's just false. I know because i've tested translation extensively for numerous novels and other works
>I can model these models well enough to fool GPT output detectors into thinking that I am a GPT model. (Give me a writing task that GPT-4 can't be prompted to perform, and I can prove that last fact to you.)
Lmao. Okay mate. The notoriously unreliable GPT detectors with more false positives than can be counted. It's really funny you think this is an achievement.
>(In fact, it might well be worse: GPT-4 is worse than GPT-3 at some of these things.)
What is 4 worse than 3 at ? Give me something that is benchmarkable and can be tested.
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#147This is obviously very cool, but at this point — who knows what I’ll say in a year — my concern with these LLMs is that they’re in the uncanny valley. Here’s one passing a very difficult test. Amazing! Now, rely on it to build a nuclear doohickey for a power station or a multi-billion dollar device for CERN or anything really and, well, no. So humans still have to check the output, and now we’re in that situation whe…
>No negativity towards AI here. It’s amazing and it’ll change the future. But we need to be careful on the way. Yeah, I suspect a lot of fields will have a similar trajectory to how AI has impacted radiology. It might catch the tumor in 99.9999% of cases, better than any human doctor. But missing a malignant tumor 0.0001% of the time is unacceptable, because it spikes the hospital's malpractice costs. So every single…
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#148This is obviously very cool, but at this point — who knows what I’ll say in a year — my concern with these LLMs is that they’re in the uncanny valley. Here’s one passing a very difficult test. Amazing! Now, rely on it to build a nuclear doohickey for a power station or a multi-billion dollar device for CERN or anything really and, well, no. So humans still have to check the output, and now we’re in that situation whe…
How is this any different from using other technology, e.g. a calculator or a power tool? Or a manager and the output of their ICs? Obviously the scope of what's possible is different but _any_ craftsman using _any_ tool will only be as good as what they verify themselves.
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#149This is obviously very cool, but at this point — who knows what I’ll say in a year — my concern with these LLMs is that they’re in the uncanny valley. Here’s one passing a very difficult test. Amazing! Now, rely on it to build a nuclear doohickey for a power station or a multi-billion dollar device for CERN or anything really and, well, no. So humans still have to check the output, and now we’re in that situation whe…
A lot of humans fake it until they make it. A lot of humans are lazy. A lot of humans are given responsibility of things that they are unqualified for. A lot of humans make mistakes. The military, for all its funding and all its training and all its planning, has lost multiple nuclear weapons, on American soil. We are imperfect machines who aspire to build more perfect versions of ourselves, through children and now…
Look at what wave done to soil, the oceans, we’re likely on the wrong track. Maybe it’s even unrecoverable.
I think we can have a much more advanced society , but we need to slow down a lot and do things more in harmony with the natural world and out our egos aside. We’d probably have a much better quality of life for doing so.
Re: GPT-4 gets a B on my quantum computing final exam
#150T/F question 1d says: >Google's recent quantum supremacy experiment demonstrated the successful use of quantum error-correction. How "recent" is the experiment in question? Would it have been publicized before GPT-4's training cutoff?