161–170 of 225 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GPT 4 tells me that on a daily basis because of the 2021 data cutoff.
So it never hallucinates APIs, theorems, biographies or places?
The first derivative is all that matters. ML gets better over time; we don't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ChatGPT is a junior developer whose knowledge is broad but shallow.
IMO this leaves out some salient details. For example, I'd say ChatGPT is a very, very good junior developer. The kind of junior developer that loves computer science, has been screwing around with miscellaneous algorithms and data structures its whole life, has a near-perfect memory, and is awake 24/7/365, but has never had to architect a data-intensive system, write future-proof code, or write code for other develo…
For example, I would not expect the same junior engineer to have such variance, given the same inputs.
Every post that claimed using ChatGPT to achieve non-trivial tasks turned out to have non-trivial human intervention. > (from the original article) In fact, I found it better to let ChatGPT generate a toy-ish version of the code first, then let it add things to it step-by-step. This resulted in much better output than, say, asking ChatGPT to generate production-quality code with all features in the first go. This als…
That means full autonomy reached in 0% of applications. How do we go from 0 to 1? By the way, until we remove the human from the loop the iteration speed is still human speed, and number of AI agents The productivity boost by current level AI is just 15%, as reported in some papers, percentage of code written by Copilot is about 50% it just helps writing out the easy parts and not much for debugging, designing, releasing, etc which take the bulk of the time, so it's probably back to 15% boost.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
English is a programming language now. That is what is being demonstrated here. Code is still being written; it just looks more like instructions given to a human programmer. Eventually, human languages will be the only high-level programming languages. Everything else will be thought of the way we currently think of assembly code: a tool of last resort, used only in unusual circumstances when nothing else will do. A…
English is a programming language once you stop looking at or storing the output of the LLM. Like a binary. I'm not seeing anybody store their prompts in a source repo and hooking it directly up to their build pipeline.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok but this is extremely new tech, all of that stuff will get better over time, and the AI will require less and less intervention.
I don't think so. Ultimately there's not enough information in prompts to produce "correct" code. And any attempt to deliver more information will result in a worse programming language, or as it is now, more iterations.
This is not really the same, but may be interesting to some: I subscribe to ChatGPT plus for a month to check out GPT-4. The rate limits were cumbersome though and it can be easy to waste a prompt, so I started to bootstrap: I would explain my problem to 3.5 and ask it to suggest comprehensive prompts to use with 4 to maximize my limited quota. It worked very well. In the long years to come the most advance AIs may b…
A basic LLM that just knows some English
+
A tree of LLMs, each fine tuned in specific topics
The basic LLM navigates the tree and gets answers from the specialized LLMs
This is not really the same, but may be interesting to some: I subscribe to ChatGPT plus for a month to check out GPT-4. The rate limits were cumbersome though and it can be easy to waste a prompt, so I started to bootstrap: I would explain my problem to 3.5 and ask it to suggest comprehensive prompts to use with 4 to maximize my limited quota. It worked very well. In the long years to come the most advance AIs may b…
"... and there are unknown, unknowns..."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lmao neither of those things I mentioned really cost more than 50 million dollars.
I personally think the same as the other comment. Do you really think money is the bottleneck? Let’s assume Sam Altman felt that way. He couldn’t drum up that cash tomorrow if he wanted??? For the pinnacle of human invention. Twitter was purchased for way way more than 50 mil.
This is not really the same, but may be interesting to some: I subscribe to ChatGPT plus for a month to check out GPT-4. The rate limits were cumbersome though and it can be easy to waste a prompt, so I started to bootstrap: I would explain my problem to 3.5 and ask it to suggest comprehensive prompts to use with 4 to maximize my limited quota. It worked very well. In the long years to come the most advance AIs may b…
Thats a great idea. I'm going to start doing this. For me it also seems GPT-4 just prints out slower. I find I can get most done with 3.5 and its faster to achieve what Im looking for. Then when I'm not satisfied with the 3.5 response I can clean it up and feed over into 4.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah at some point gpt4 loses track and just consistently is wrong. Lately I can't feed it too much info, the longer the context the more issues. With your suggestion, it doesn't know which part of the iteration is correct at the moment. For us iteration is logically but for chatgpt I think it's just more variables that make the chance of being wrong larger. So you need to build that in somehow that it can iterativel…
Isn't the issue that things fall out of context and then it starts hallucinating a lot more ? Sometimes it helps to just start a new prompt
I have some success saying "no, undo that," waiting for it to return the corrected version, and only then continuing.
Oobabooga's UI is better at this, since you can remove erroneous outputs from the context and edit your previous input to steer it in the right direction.
Given that OpenAI mines conversations for training data it seems to align with their interests to make you give up and start a new prompt. More abandoned prompts = more training data.