81–90 of 1001 posts
Can someone explain to me what is their "prompting-scaffolding" to make it work ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Managing a McDonalds is a question of integration and modalities at this point. I don't think anyone still doubts that these models lack the reasoning capability or world knowledge needed for the job. So it's less of a fundamental technical problem and more of a process engineering issue.
The capability they lack is being able to be sued.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity
Assuming you can still sue McDonalds I am not sure if this is a problem in the robotic llm case. I'm also trying to imagine a case where you would want to sue the llm and not the company. Given robots/llm don't have free will I'm not sure the problem with qualified immunity making police unaccountable applies.
There already exist a lot of similar conventions in corporate law. Generally, a main advantage of incorporation is protecting the people making the decisions from personal lawsuits.
While the result is impressive, this blog post is extremely disappointing. - It does not show an example of the new best solution, nor explain why they couldn't show an example (e.g. if the proof was not constructive) - It does not even explain the previous best solution. The diagram of the rescaled unit grid doesn't indicate what the "points" are beyond the normal non-scaled unit grid. I have no idea what to take aw…
To the “LLMs just interpolate their training data” crowd: Ayer, and in a different way early Wittgenstein, held that mathematical truths don’t report new facts about the world. Proofs unfold what is already implicit in axioms, definitions, symbols, and rules. I think that idea is deeply fascinating, AND have no problem that we still credit mathematicians with discoveries. So either “recombining existing material” isn…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I absolutely believe that AI will supercharge science. I do not believe it will replace humans.
I absolutely believe that AI will supercharge science and replace humans. Why shouldn't it? Humans are poorly optimized for almost anything, and built on a substrate that's barely hanging together
Is there a reason why we only hear of Erdos problems being solved? I would imagine there are a myriad of other unsolved problems in math, but every single ChatGPT "breakthrough in math" I come across on r/singularity and r/accelerate are Erdos problems.
It's a large set of problems that are both interesting and difficult, but not seen as foundational enough or important enough that they have already had sustained attention on them by mathematicians for decades or centuries, and so they might actually be solvable by an LLM.
I dunno, I'm skeptical without proof. I've had the MAX+ plan for a while and I'm sorry, the quality between GPT vs Claude is night and day difference. Claude understands. GPT stumbles over every request I give it.
As I have stated before, AI will win a fields medal before it can manage a McDonald's A difficult part was constructing a chess board on which to play math (Lean). Now it's just pattern recognition and computation. LLMs are just the beginning, we'll see more specialized math AI resembling StockFish soon.
See the longstanding debate on whether new math is "invented" or "discovered". Most mathematicians I knew thought it's discovered.