31–40 of 374 posts
Very interesting article. IMHO a key factor in how the world changes in the next 10-20 years will be how far the current wave of AI, based on neural networks can go. If scientists and engineers manage to implement autonomous cars and robots that can do basic human tasks like clean, wait and take care of the sick and elderly we will wake up in a brand new world. It will put a lot of stress on the basics of society, su…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I asked ChatGPT how to add a JSDoc type to a Vue 2 prop and it gave me a wrong answer. There have been several times where I’ve asked it questions and it sprinkles in well disguised misinformation. These tools are impressive but they definitely have limitations.
Curious, how does it do when you give it examples / use playground.openai? I find that no examples often leads to the same result as a befuddled junior, but with examples often it gains confidence. Also I find playground to give me much better code snippets than chat sometimes
There's a lot of "extraneous" information and details that appear useless and unrelated, but that long-time developers have tucked away in their brains (or really anyone who has done something at a high level for a long time), that turns out to be incredibly useful; generally these people don't require examples - they just know what the right answer is, because they've been exposed to a variety of problems over a long career or lifespan.
That's where LLMs need to be to be truly "useful". I think if we get them to that point, we'll really have something useful on our hands.
"we are already at the tail end of the current wave of AI." Is that really true? Generative AI spending this year just so far is 4x greater than last year, and the results of that spending haven't been released yet. How can they conclude this? Most "predictions" about the future I've seen assume that ChatGPT will stay the same and not improve for the next 10 years, or only marginally. Why they make this assumption, I…
I believe the OpenAI folks have already said something to that effect a while ago as well.
For end users, the results of tweaks/computational power will seem like "breakthrough" to them but it's fundamentally not.
This entire piece is based on one massive, unsupported assertion, which is that LLM progress will cease. Or, as the author puts it, "we are at the tail end of the first wave of large language model-based AI... [it] ends somewhere in the next year or two with the kinds of limits people are running up against." I want to know only one thing, which is what gives him the confidence necessary to say that. If that one stat…
Hallucinations to the normal person are a bug.
The issue is that only humans can hallucinate. We know there is a “reality”.
For an LLM, everything it does is a hallucination.
That’s why you have more POCs than production goods. Your “hallucination rate” is unknown.
Yesterday Ars has an article that described LLMs as a new type of CPU for a new type of architecture. Others want “LawLLM” or “healthLLM”.
These are simply not going to happen.
If you even get it to 80% accuracy- it’s a 1/5 chance you have a relevant answer.
The issue isn’t a technical one.
It’s expectations.
"We are quickly reaching the limits of current AI" So many words in this piece, but nothing to back up this primary assertion.
They are saying JSON works perfectly with chatgpt (gpt4) and still out of 10 queries I get 1 or 2 messed up. I can't depend on it yet. Image generation is still terrible and useless, can't use for programming, text-to-speech neural still sucks big time, not sure who is doing what with it. Almost feels like crypto-hype.
This entire piece is based on one massive, unsupported assertion, which is that LLM progress will cease. Or, as the author puts it, "we are at the tail end of the first wave of large language model-based AI... [it] ends somewhere in the next year or two with the kinds of limits people are running up against." I want to know only one thing, which is what gives him the confidence necessary to say that. If that one stat…
I asked ChatGPT how to add a JSDoc type to a Vue 2 prop and it gave me a wrong answer. There have been several times where I’ve asked it questions and it sprinkles in well disguised misinformation. These tools are impressive but they definitely have limitations.
If you don't pay for ChatGPT, you get GPT-3.5. You can also get access to GPT-4 if you use the playground.
This entire piece is based on one massive, unsupported assertion, which is that LLM progress will cease. Or, as the author puts it, "we are at the tail end of the first wave of large language model-based AI... [it] ends somewhere in the next year or two with the kinds of limits people are running up against." I want to know only one thing, which is what gives him the confidence necessary to say that. If that one stat…
Sounds like a pretty good guesstimation. Well, not cease, just fizzle out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I asked ChatGPT how to add a JSDoc type to a Vue 2 prop and it gave me a wrong answer. There have been several times where I’ve asked it questions and it sprinkles in well disguised misinformation. These tools are impressive but they definitely have limitations.
Are you using GPT-4? If not, it's understandable. If you don't pay for ChatGPT, you get GPT-3.5. You can also get access to GPT-4 if you use the playground.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Definitely not. You wouldn't like the food, cars and home appliances of 1969, and you really wouldn't like the healthcare.
The food of 1969? I've had it. It was my aunt's cooking and my uncle's butchering - shooting a hog right in the head and then gutting it, draining the blood, and prepping it to go onto a gigantic smoker, and it was delicious. And if you really didn't feel like cooking food yourself, McDonald's did exist back then, along with things like Kentucky Fried Chicken, Krystal, Burger King, etc. They didn't throw sugar into e…
https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2004/data/papers/SS0...
The aspics were pretty good though.
Couldn't have had eg good Brussels sprouts though, we hadn't invented them yet.