411–420 of 533 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not meaningless because part of the discussion is the issue of anthropomorphizing this tech. When we use language like “intelligent” it carries hints of personhood. People begin sadly treating these things as persons. We can reap the benefits while clearly telling the consumer this is just a language algorithm.
Personhood is poorly defined.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Creating the model takes intelligence, but running it doesn’t. I think the point everybody’s revolving around is that the transformer model is an absurdly inefficient and low-fidelity approximation of a system that acts, observes consequences, and incorporates that feedback going forward. The issue isn’t really harness vs. no harness. IMO it’s about the lack of an internally generated sense of what to attend to. Yes,…
You're so close... And where is the magic "uncomputable spark" located inside of you? If you say analog thermodynamic noise - then ok, if we use true thermodynamic RNG for LLM activation function, will that meet the criteria? But what if super determinism is the law of the land? Then nobody is anything but computable from priors...
It's not some tiny "uncomputable spark" you need to look for, most of it is entirely uncomputable.
Where is the computable part in me that is doing all this thinking and being a person? Where is that "tiny spark", point me at it :)
That last image is bizarre. The quiche, cream and even the salad look like they've been given the trypophobia treatment. Which might even make sense, because there were always (still are?) those horrible ads in the chumbox area of news sites that used trypophobia and other creepy body-horror stuff to get you to click. [1] So maybe the hope is that you don't really look closely at the quiche, but some reptilian party…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment thread was started with discussions of AI doing a bad job at a task (communication). Doesn't the Chinese Room posit an AI good at the task of communication?
AIs are better communicators that most of people I have worked with in my life. They are infinitely patient, don't mind going into more detail if I ask, not too bad at summary, have no ego and don't boast. They are also not too afraid of hurting my feelings, they will tell me my code sux if it does. I'd don't care if they fit a definition intelligent, they are good colleagues. They have strengths and weaknesses sure,…
Yes they do, and they famously do it quite a lot.
> they will tell me my code sux if it does
If they knew when code sux, someone should write an agentic loop around that.
That last image is bizarre. The quiche, cream and even the salad look like they've been given the trypophobia treatment. Which might even make sense, because there were always (still are?) those horrible ads in the chumbox area of news sites that used trypophobia and other creepy body-horror stuff to get you to click. [1] So maybe the hope is that you don't really look closely at the quiche, but some reptilian party…
This is a quirk of the last gpt image model (gpt-image-2). It put this sort of high frequency noise on all of the image especially if it's in a "drawn" style. There is often lots of other tells that this model in particular generated it. Image models somewhat watermarking the image in a way that's very easily identifiable by a human seems present in all the image models of the big labs, since DALL-E 3 on OpenAI's sid…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that different, when a human proposes a better definition vis-a-vis a competing one for example, they would defend this by certain desiderata. Often a mathematician or physicist will use their intuition to speed up the naive brute force of candidate well formed formula variations so that the desired properties emerge, postulating the existence of an intersection on multiple desiderata can in itself be viewed…
You're conflating a discussion about current LLM capabilities with your fantasies about nonexistent future AI. LLMs act nothing like this, and the small example you're giving is only a small part of the things that LLMs can't do.
Computer science is about what LLMs fundamentally are. If you implicitly focus on "actually existing LLMs", and require others do this, then that is not computer science. That is politics.
That last image is bizarre. The quiche, cream and even the salad look like they've been given the trypophobia treatment. Which might even make sense, because there were always (still are?) those horrible ads in the chumbox area of news sites that used trypophobia and other creepy body-horror stuff to get you to click. [1] So maybe the hope is that you don't really look closely at the quiche, but some reptilian party…
These kinds of images are disingenuous. Modern image generating models have way higher quality of output, and in most cases you wouldn't even know it is generated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... including the "novel" math solutions, all of which appear to just be "a composition of solutions humans have developed and documented elsewhere" upon deeper inspection. But that is precisely what human mathematicians do, prove new theorems by combining ones proven earlier. I don't see any fundamental difference in functionality between human intellectual contributions vs performant ML ones (LLM or otherwise). W…
> But that is precisely what human mathematicians do, prove new theorems by combining ones proven earlier. I’d say “ understanding and building upon ones proven earlier”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... including the "novel" math solutions, all of which appear to just be "a composition of solutions humans have developed and documented elsewhere" upon deeper inspection. But that is precisely what human mathematicians do, prove new theorems by combining ones proven earlier. I don't see any fundamental difference in functionality between human intellectual contributions vs performant ML ones (LLM or otherwise). W…
> Just like LLM's we sometimes correctly predict the next token or word, and sometimes incorrectly. There is no "correct" next word when it comes to communicating with an actual human.