Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI isn’t good enough

skventures.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 374 posts

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#171

Post by garblegarble »

pdimitar wrote: post #161
garblegarble wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Live systems in nature seem to solve similar problems with way less compute available Do they really? They're certainly more energy-efficient in business-as-usual mode, but a human brain has 86 billion neurons, 600+ trillion synapses(!), and each instance takes 15-20+ years to train to do complex logical tasks. Even if the per-cell work is tiny (and, is it? cells are amazingly complex), 86 billion (or 600+ trillion)…

You are ignoring the fact that a toddler, once their musculature develops, is able to learn to walk after several tries. Show me a humanoid robot that can do that.

At that point, the toddler's still run years of self-reinforced learning (as well as learning supported by parents, and observing other humans solving the problem) on controlling their muscles... and again, think of the computational power expended over that time (by a computational approach that's been highly-optimised over millions of years of trial-and-error recursive descent style). Our intellect and capabilities are the result of a truly vast amount of computation in the grand scheme of things.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that Machine Learning is as generally capable as animals/humans, and I don't entirely disagree with the OP (i.e. I don't know if our current approach has a chance of scaling to human-level capabilities). I just don't think computation-wise it compares that badly to animals, considering that it's the result of a few decades of work, largely on repurposed silicon

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#172

Post by albertzeyer »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #30

"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…

Also, if we add videos, images, audio, whatever other data we have, there is still quite some orders of magnitude more data available.

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#173

Post by firtoz »

Ekaros wrote: post #170

How far are we from a point you could leave AI to prompt something itself. That is not just respond to something, but actively seek it. Let's say use this place. Could it without being ordered read articles, comments and add it own comments? Maybe search internet by itself for relevant content and post it? Maybe try to earn maximal amount of upvotes? And all this without there being any bit of code poking it to do it…

I was going to ask "how would it know what's a good post" but it's embarrassingly easy to train the AI on interesting or not content based on upvote information...

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#174

Post by Hoasi »

firtoz wrote: post #173
Ekaros wrote: post #170

How far are we from a point you could leave AI to prompt something itself. That is not just respond to something, but actively seek it. Let's say use this place. Could it without being ordered read articles, comments and add it own comments? Maybe search internet by itself for relevant content and post it? Maybe try to earn maximal amount of upvotes? And all this without there being any bit of code poking it to do it…

I was going to ask "how would it know what's a good post" but it's embarrassingly easy to train the AI on interesting or not content based on upvote information...

> but it's embarrassingly easy to train the AI on interesting or not content based on upvote information...

And yet, the best topics and answers do not necessarily correlate with the most upvoted.

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#175

Post by firtoz »

Hoasi wrote: post #174
firtoz wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was going to ask "how would it know what's a good post" but it's embarrassingly easy to train the AI on interesting or not content based on upvote information...

> but it's embarrassingly easy to train the AI on interesting or not content based on upvote information... And yet, the best topics and answers do not necessarily correlate with the most upvoted.

How would you qualify the best?

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#176

Post by veave »

Ekaros wrote: post #170

How far are we from a point you could leave AI to prompt something itself. That is not just respond to something, but actively seek it. Let's say use this place. Could it without being ordered read articles, comments and add it own comments? Maybe search internet by itself for relevant content and post it? Maybe try to earn maximal amount of upvotes? And all this without there being any bit of code poking it to do it…

>Let's say use this place.

You think this isn't already happening?

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#177

Post by Ekaros »

veave wrote: post #176
Ekaros wrote: post #170

How far are we from a point you could leave AI to prompt something itself. That is not just respond to something, but actively seek it. Let's say use this place. Could it without being ordered read articles, comments and add it own comments? Maybe search internet by itself for relevant content and post it? Maybe try to earn maximal amount of upvotes? And all this without there being any bit of code poking it to do it…

>Let's say use this place. You think this isn't already happening?

I think it comes to nebulous concept of out of "free will". Just not have a "bot" running some loop. But have entirely self-acting AI. One that could for instead go and find Reddit or Lemmy or some other place.

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#178

Post by danielbln »

nottorp wrote: post #130
Rereereetret wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And while you mention one article with a negative experience, tons of positive article came out too. GitHub copilot is really good and useful. All demos I saw which use LLMs were spectacular. The ai race started this year for everyone which means we will continuesly see progress. And while you only mention LlM the whole ai space is crazy. There is a high chance that the architecture from LLMs will change. And we have…

> All demos I saw which use LLMs were spectacular. Aren't demos always spectacular?

Blockchain demos sure weren't.

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#179

Post by lynx23 »

pdimitar wrote: post #161
garblegarble wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Live systems in nature seem to solve similar problems with way less compute available Do they really? They're certainly more energy-efficient in business-as-usual mode, but a human brain has 86 billion neurons, 600+ trillion synapses(!), and each instance takes 15-20+ years to train to do complex logical tasks. Even if the per-cell work is tiny (and, is it? cells are amazingly complex), 86 billion (or 600+ trillion)…

You are ignoring the fact that a toddler, once their musculature develops, is able to learn to walk after several tries. Show me a humanoid robot that can do that.

A toddler capable of walking is still miles away from the topic at hand, a LLM capable of processing relatively complex text. It is well know that humans have a particularily long training period compared to other animals. So I dont understand why you are bringing up the walking-training. It seems quite unrelated.

Re: AI isn’t good enough

#180

Post by countWSS »

Data-centric token-guessing will be outperformed by more complex architectures, LLMs are too inefficient and their hardware requirements are disproportionate for the utility. Building a sand castle of "LLM apis" that rely on plugging their deficiences is a fundamentally bad decision that hides the underlying waste of resources. What will be great if the input data it was fed was more structured and labeled like images: imaging a "Book, 17th century, reliablity:54%, contains geographic errors". Instead this "attention is all you need" approach treats garbage data equal to top material.
Post reply on HN