11–20 of 359 posts
Someone said, "The AI you use today is the worst AI that you will ever use."
Future AI's will be more powerful but probably influenced to push users to spend money or have a political opinion. So they may enshitify...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't tell any difference between Claude 3.5, 3.7 and 4 for coding. So today is the same AI I used last year. And based on current trajectory same I will use next year.
I can tell the difference between those versions of Claude quite easily. Not 10x better each version, but each is more capable and the errors are fewer.
> Few phenomena demonstrate the perils that can accompany AI illiteracy as well as “Chatgpt induced psychosis,” the subject of a recent Rolling Stone article about the growing number of people who think their LLM is a sapient spiritual guide. Some users have come to believe that the chatbot they’re interacting with is a god—“ChatGPT Jesus,” as a man whose wife fell prey to LLM-inspired delusions put it—while others a…
Psychosis will find anything as a seed idea to express itself, even as basic a pattern as someone walking in lockstep with the soon-to-be patient can trigger a break. So it's not surprising that LLM chats would do the same.
Someone said, "The AI you use today is the worst AI that you will ever use."
I can't tell any difference between Claude 3.5, 3.7 and 4 for coding. So today is the same AI I used last year. And based on current trajectory same I will use next year.
It's important that the general public understands their capabilities, even if they don't grasp how they work on a technical level. This is an essential part of making them safe to use, which no disclaimer or PR puff piece about how deeply your company cares about safety will ever do.
But, of course, marketing them as "AI" that's capable of "reasoning", and showcasing how good they are at fabricated benchmarks, builds hype, which directly impacts valuations. Pattern recognition and data generation systems aren't nearly as sexy.
> Few phenomena demonstrate the perils that can accompany AI illiteracy as well as “Chatgpt induced psychosis,” the subject of a recent Rolling Stone article about the growing number of people who think their LLM is a sapient spiritual guide. Some users have come to believe that the chatbot they’re interacting with is a god—“ChatGPT Jesus,” as a man whose wife fell prey to LLM-inspired delusions put it—while others a…
People have been caught in that trap ever since the invention of religion. This is not a new problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Psychosis will find anything as a seed idea to express itself, even as basic a pattern as someone walking in lockstep with the soon-to-be patient can trigger a break. So it's not surprising that LLM chats would do the same.
Yeah, but should we have psychosis force multipliers?
LLMs are impressive probability gadgets that have been fed nearly the entire internet, and produce writing not by thinking but by making statistically informed guesses about which lexical item is likely to follow another
So you're not so much talking to statistical model as having a conversation with a Kenyan data labeler, fuzzily adapted through a transformer model to match the topic you've brought up.
While thw distinction doesn't change the substance of the article, it's valuable context and it's important to dispel the idea that training on the internet does this. Such training gives you GPT2. GPT4.5 is efficiently stored low- cost labor.
Someone said, "The AI you use today is the worst AI that you will ever use."
It's like if we'd said the Youtube we used in 2015 was going to be the worst Youtube we'd ever use.
Someone said, "The AI you use today is the worst AI that you will ever use."
Someone also said the current AI is the less biased. Future AI's will be more powerful but probably influenced to push users to spend money or have a political opinion. So they may enshitify...