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

A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

generativehistory.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 328 posts

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#161

Post by snickerbockers »

BobbyTables2 wrote: post #152
snickerbockers wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uhhh can it? I've certainly not seen any evidence of an AI generating something not based on its training set. It's certainly smart enough to shuffle code around and make superficial changes, and that's pretty impressive in its own way but not particularly useful unless your only goal is to just launder somebody else's code to get around a licensing problem (and even then it's questionable if that's a derived work or…

You have to realize AI is trained the same way one would train an auto-completer. Theres no cognition. It’s not taught language, grammar, etc. none of that! It’s only seen a huge amount of text that allows it to recognize answers to questions. Unfortunately, it appears to work so people see it as the equivalent to sci-fi movie AI. It’s really just a search engine.

I agree and that's the case I'm trying to make. The machine-learning community expects us to believe that it is somehow comparable to human cognition, yet the way it learns is inherently inhuman. If an LLM was in any way similar to a human I would expect that, like a human, it might require a little bit of guidance as it learns but ultimately it would be capable of understanding concepts well enough that it doesn't need to have memorized every book in the library just to perform simple tasks.

In fact, I would expect it to be able to reproduce past human discoveries it hasn't even been exposed to, and if the AI is actually capable of this then it should be possible for them to set up a controlled experiment wherein it is given a limited "education" and must discover something already known to the researchers but not the machine. That nobody has done this tells me that either they have low confidence in the AI despite their bravado, or that they already have tried it and the machine failed.

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#162

Post by ozgrakkurt »

kazinator wrote: post #136
brulard wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is quite a narrow view of how the generation works. AI can extrapolate from the training set and explore new directions. It's not just cutting pieces and gluing together.

Positively not. It is pure interpolation and not extrapolation. The training set is vast and supports an even vaster set of possible traversal paths; but they are all interpolative. Same with diffusion and everything else. It is not extrapolation that you can transfer the style of Van Gogh onto a photographl it is interpolation. Extrapolation might be something like inventing a style: how did Van Gogh do that? And, s…

This is how people do things as well imo. LLM does the same thing on some level but it is just not good enough for majority of use cases

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#163

Post by barremian »

> it codes fully functioning Windows and Apple OS clones, 3D design software, Nintendo emulators, and productivity suites from single prompts

> As is so often the case with AI, that is exciting and frightening all at once

> we need to extrapolate from this small example to think more broadly: if this holds the models are about to make similar leaps in any field where visual precision and skilled reasoning must work together required

> this will be a big deal when it’s released

> What appears to be happening here is a form of emergent, implicit reasoning, the spontaneous combination of perception, memory, and logic inside a statistical model

> model’s ability to make a correct, contextually grounded inference that requires several layers of symbolic reasoning suggests that something new may be happening inside these systems—an emergent form of abstract reasoning that arises not from explicit programming but from scale and complexity itself

Just another post with extreme hyperbolic wording to blow up another model release. How many times have we seen such non-realistic build up in the past couple of years.

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#164

Post by ninetyninenine »

BobbyTables2 wrote: post #152
snickerbockers wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uhhh can it? I've certainly not seen any evidence of an AI generating something not based on its training set. It's certainly smart enough to shuffle code around and make superficial changes, and that's pretty impressive in its own way but not particularly useful unless your only goal is to just launder somebody else's code to get around a licensing problem (and even then it's questionable if that's a derived work or…

You have to realize AI is trained the same way one would train an auto-completer. Theres no cognition. It’s not taught language, grammar, etc. none of that! It’s only seen a huge amount of text that allows it to recognize answers to questions. Unfortunately, it appears to work so people see it as the equivalent to sci-fi movie AI. It’s really just a search engine.

no it's not I work on AI and what these things do are much much more then a search engine or an autocomplete. If an autocomplete passed the turing test you'd dismiss it because it's still an autocomplete.

The characterization you are regurgitating here is from laymen who do not understand AI. You are not just mildly wrong but wildly uninformed.

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#165

Post by ninetyninenine »

snickerbockers wrote: post #104
brulard wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is quite a narrow view of how the generation works. AI can extrapolate from the training set and explore new directions. It's not just cutting pieces and gluing together.

uhhh can it? I've certainly not seen any evidence of an AI generating something not based on its training set. It's certainly smart enough to shuffle code around and make superficial changes, and that's pretty impressive in its own way but not particularly useful unless your only goal is to just launder somebody else's code to get around a licensing problem (and even then it's questionable if that's a derived work or…

>I've certainly not seen any evidence of an AI generating something not based on its training set.

There is plenty of evidence for this. You have to be blind not to realize this. Just ask the AI to generate something not in it's training set.

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#166

Post by ezst »

snickerbockers wrote: post #161
BobbyTables2 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to realize AI is trained the same way one would train an auto-completer. Theres no cognition. It’s not taught language, grammar, etc. none of that! It’s only seen a huge amount of text that allows it to recognize answers to questions. Unfortunately, it appears to work so people see it as the equivalent to sci-fi movie AI. It’s really just a search engine.

I agree and that's the case I'm trying to make. The machine-learning community expects us to believe that it is somehow comparable to human cognition, yet the way it learns is inherently inhuman. If an LLM was in any way similar to a human I would expect that, like a human, it might require a little bit of guidance as it learns but ultimately it would be capable of understanding concepts well enough that it doesn't n…

> The machine-learning community

Is it? I only see a few individuals, VCs, and tech giants overblowing LLMs capabilities (and still puzzled as to how the latter dragged themselves into a race to the bottom through it). I don't believe the academic field really is that impressed with LLMs.

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#167

Post by throwaway173738 »

brulard wrote: post #88
snickerbockers wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally novel either refers to something that is new, or a certain type of literature. If the AI is generating something functionally equivalent to a program in its training set (in this case, dozens or even hundreds of such programs) then it by definition cannot be novel.

This is quite a narrow view of how the generation works. AI can extrapolate from the training set and explore new directions. It's not just cutting pieces and gluing together.

Calling it “exploring” is anthropomorphising. The machine has weights that yield meaningful programs given specification-like language. It’s a useful phenomenon but it may be nothing like what we do.

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#168

Post by throwaway173738 »

snickerbockers wrote: post #161
BobbyTables2 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to realize AI is trained the same way one would train an auto-completer. Theres no cognition. It’s not taught language, grammar, etc. none of that! It’s only seen a huge amount of text that allows it to recognize answers to questions. Unfortunately, it appears to work so people see it as the equivalent to sci-fi movie AI. It’s really just a search engine.

I agree and that's the case I'm trying to make. The machine-learning community expects us to believe that it is somehow comparable to human cognition, yet the way it learns is inherently inhuman. If an LLM was in any way similar to a human I would expect that, like a human, it might require a little bit of guidance as it learns but ultimately it would be capable of understanding concepts well enough that it doesn't n…

There’s a third possible reason which is that they’re taking it as a given that the machine is “intelligent” as a sales tactic, and they’re not academic enough to want to test anything they believe.

Re: A new Google model is nearly perfect on automated handwriting recognition

#169

Post by kazinator »

BoorishBears wrote: post #154
kazinator wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Positively not. It is pure interpolation and not extrapolation. The training set is vast and supports an even vaster set of possible traversal paths; but they are all interpolative. Same with diffusion and everything else. It is not extrapolation that you can transfer the style of Van Gogh onto a photographl it is interpolation. Extrapolation might be something like inventing a style: how did Van Gogh do that? And, s…

This is knock against you at all , but in a naive attempt to spare someone else some time: remember that based on this definition it is impossible for an LLM to do novel things and more importantly , you're not going to change how this person defines a concept as integral to one's being as novelty. I personally think this is a bit tautological of a definition, but if you hold it, then yes LLMs are not capable of anyt…

That is not strictly true, because being able to transfer the style of Van Gogh onto an arbitrary photographic scene is novel in a sense, but it is interpolative.

Mashups are not purely derivative: the choice of what to mash up carries novelty: two (or more) representations are mashed together which hitherto have not been.

We cannot deny that something is new.

Post reply on HN