111–120 of 607 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but don't we expect GPT 5.5 Pro will eventually be a free tier? Maybe I'm missing something because I only use the free tier. But the free tier has gotten way better over the last few years. I'm pretty sure, based on descriptions on this site from paid subscribers, that the free tier now is better than the paid tier of say 2 years ago. That's the lag I'm wondering about.
You should pay for it if you find value in it.
The LLM took an entirely different route, using a formula that was well known in related parts of math, but which no one had thought to apply to this type of question. Of course LLMs are still absolutely useless at actual maths computation, but I think this is one area where AI can excel --- the ability to combine many sources of knowledge and synthesise, may sometimes yield very useful results. Also reminds me of th…
The LLM took an entirely different route, using a formula that was well known in related parts of math, but which no one had thought to apply to this type of question. Of course LLMs are still absolutely useless at actual maths computation, but I think this is one area where AI can excel --- the ability to combine many sources of knowledge and synthesise, may sometimes yield very useful results. Also reminds me of th…
Wait, what do you mean "LLMs are still absolutely useless at actual maths computation"? I rely on them constantly for maths (linear algebra, multivariable calc, stat) --- literally thousands of problems run through GPT5 over the last 12 months, and to my recollection zero failures. But maybe you're thinking of something more specific?
I wonder if the rationalizations people come up with for why this isn't real intelligence will be as creative as ChatGPTs solution.
I wonder if the rationalizations people come up with for why this isn't real intelligence will be as creative as ChatGPTs solution.
I wonder if the rationalizations people come up with for why this isn't real intelligence will be as creative as ChatGPTs solution.
And how about the creative rationalizations about how statistical text generation is actual intelligence? As if there is any intent or motive behind the words that are generated or the ability to learn literally any new thing after it has been trained on human output?
I don't doubt that there are many very real and meaningful limitations of these systems that deserve to be called out. But "text generation" isn't doing that work.
[deleted]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are bad at math. But they are good at writing code and as an optimization some providers have it secretly write code to answer the problem, run it and give you the answer without telling you what it did in the middle part.
Are they bad at math? Or are they bad at arithmetic?
I wonder if the rationalizations people come up with for why this isn't real intelligence will be as creative as ChatGPTs solution.
With real general intelligence you'd expect it to solve problems above a certain difficulty with a good clip