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

GPU World

gpuworld.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 303 posts

Re: GPU World

#271

Post by ipsod »

HarlequinHair wrote: post #240
ipsod wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a technology is convenient for people, you shouldn't need to insist to make people use it. This is like the railroads, and the tracks have been laid. Because of the enormous cost, it can't be left to "hope they'll find it useful," and has to be pushed like crazy, or we're going to be left with a train system with no goods or passengers, and no path into the future. Personally, having AI as an intelligence I can…

> This is like the railroads, and the tracks have been laid. Except that for railroads I don't need people to convince me about how/when/why it can be useful. Railroads came out to solve an issue we had (and then it evolved). LLMs are not giving us any new solution, just different speed (better) and quality (worse) to solve things we co&ld already solve. It's basically the same concept as fast fashion. Worse quality,…

Nobody convinced me AI was useful. At this point, nobody could convince me it wasn't - it's like going from whittling stuff out of wood to having a kitted-out fully-manned machine shop.

It's clear from your words you lack experience and skill in this area - you've only got opinions.

Re: GPU World

#272

Post by pixl97 »

matsemann wrote: post #100
jedberg wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it isn't. I've put human written material in there (my own unpublished material) and it says 90%+ AI. Then I put some AI material in and it said 30% chance of AI. I only tested it with the two pieces, but was not impressed.

Everything has false positives or negatives. 2 examples doesn't tell anything about how good or bad it is.

Being that Panagram lies about its effectiveness in their presentations while hiding it's actual capabilities and testing methods rather deeply I have little faith in it. (1 in 10000 wrong in presentations verses 2-4% wrong in testing).

For example they have a corpus of older pre-llm text and use that as the example their current model doesn't misclassify human written text. It shouldn't take much thinking to realize why this is a fucking stupid benchmark.

Every day humans use LLMs and read LLM content Panagram becomes more useless because it forces languages to have a stopping point sometime around 2020. If you adopt any LLMism or are one of those unlucky people that already talked like an LLM before LLMs then all your shit is getting marked even though it was created by the human mind and written by human hands.

Re: GPU World

#273

Post by jedberg »

calmoo wrote: post #228
jedberg wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it isn't. I've put human written material in there (my own unpublished material) and it says 90%+ AI. Then I put some AI material in and it said 30% chance of AI. I only tested it with the two pieces, but was not impressed.

I’ve never actually seen someone give an example of what they say pangram get wrong, so please go ahead and share.

You can read it here: https://gist.github.com/jedberg/e24124e577c0da1c8445c22798eb...

I posted here on HN but it got removed.

Re: GPU World

#274

Post by alexashka »

DrScientist wrote: post #187
alexashka wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I can do any better than you by asking the most advanced LLM to be as pedantic as possible whilst not addressing anything actually being said. Congratulations, I suppose?

I was responding to 2 assertions, used to justify an argument, that clearly don't hold water. ie a replacement rate of 1 isn't some immediate existential threat, and that making arguments like 'species aren't happy' is completely specious ( sic ). If you want a wider argument - then the reality is the birth rate is dropping because when women have the choice ( via birth control and increased socio-economic independen…

> they are largely choosing to have less children

If the suicide rate rapidly increases, will you also say they are largely choosing to have less life?

Nothing to see here, just choices.

> So by definition, given it's a choice - women are happier.

So by definition, given it's a choice, people who commit suicide are happier.

Re: GPU World

#275

Post by stevepotter »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #212
setopt wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with this take. While LLMs themselves are currently unreliable, the work done in the math community on hooking up creative LLMs to reliable verifiers like Lean show that it’s possible to construct systems where the unreliability is suppressed. For now, that still requires experts to set up and monitor, but I do believe that in a couple of decades we’ll make progress on how to do more mundane tasks in a rel…

I don't think you've said anything different than the person you're responding to. The difference primarily seems to be whether you think AI is transformative vs simply being another tool (which is really just a matter of perspective). If you're not an expert software engineer, it's transformative. If you are, it's just another tool.

I’m an expert software engineer. I would categorize something that multiplies my productivity by > 2x is transformative. AI has certainly done that and more for me

Re: GPU World

#276

Post by david-gpu »

HarlequinHair wrote: post #263
david-gpu wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people use [the Internet] to replace [Sears catalogs] or [paper mail], you can see how this new invention is not really adding anything you already hadn't.

It would have been a good counter-example, if only internet wasn't: - adding encryption - removing processing time - removing geography - removing logistic issues ... and much more at a convenient price. They basically invented teleportation for sear catalogs and paper mail, can you see how this is different? Also, Internet was built to solve a problem we had, and it solved it beautifully and at reasonable prices. I…

You can ask LLMs questions about an immense variety of subjects, and they can give you customized explanations to those questions. It is as if an acquaintance of yours had digested Wikipedia and tens of thousands of books and had infinite patience to help you understand whatever you are curious about. And while the answers are not going to be picture perfect every time, just like Wikipedia or a well-educated acquaintance, they will be generally very useful.

I understand exactly what the Internet of the 90s did and did not do, because I was there to witness it myself. I had these same types of conversations with naysayers back then. Guess who was right?

Re: GPU World

#277

Post by stevepotter »

roel_v wrote: post #170
stevepotter wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it’s so powerful and versatile. The other day my wife took a picture of our living room and chathgpt picked out the perfect rug. That’s both a better search and avoided, say, an interior decorator. In that scenario it’s kinda both.

But only a small part of AI applications are that search-like. I mean we could even argue if this is still only search, but that's semantics and boring. But even if we would, there are a lot more applications than pure search. So the GP's original claim that it's just an improved form of something that doesn't put people out of a job, and also puts large amounts of people out of a job, doesn't make sense. Framing tax…

I think we agree. I think we’ve barely touched the surface on its applications. It’s digitized reasoning. That’s hard to wrap one’s head around. My hope is that the vertical applications that gain traction aren’t from a handful of companies.

Re: GPU World

#278

Post by HarlequinHair »

ipsod wrote: post #271
HarlequinHair wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is like the railroads, and the tracks have been laid. Except that for railroads I don't need people to convince me about how/when/why it can be useful. Railroads came out to solve an issue we had (and then it evolved). LLMs are not giving us any new solution, just different speed (better) and quality (worse) to solve things we co&ld already solve. It's basically the same concept as fast fashion. Worse quality,…

Nobody convinced me AI was useful. At this point, nobody could convince me it wasn't - it's like going from whittling stuff out of wood to having a kitted-out fully-manned machine shop. It's clear from your words you lack experience and skill in this area - you've only got opinions.

My "only" experience happen to be coding 5 days a week with agentic AI, plus reviews.

Only because I do not share your point of view it doesn't mean I lack experience or skills.

You are pretty fast at jumping at conclusions.

Re: GPU World

#279

Post by HarlequinHair »

david-gpu wrote: post #276
HarlequinHair wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would have been a good counter-example, if only internet wasn't: - adding encryption - removing processing time - removing geography - removing logistic issues ... and much more at a convenient price. They basically invented teleportation for sear catalogs and paper mail, can you see how this is different? Also, Internet was built to solve a problem we had, and it solved it beautifully and at reasonable prices. I…

You can ask LLMs questions about an immense variety of subjects, and they can give you customized explanations to those questions. It is as if an acquaintance of yours had digested Wikipedia and tens of thousands of books and had infinite patience to help you understand whatever you are curious about. And while the answers are not going to be picture perfect every time, just like Wikipedia or a well-educated acquaint…

Maybe you have all the means to avoid sycophancy bias and other flaws LLMs have by design, this doesn't mean that everyone can use it the same way.

The fact the you were right in a previous topic, doesn't grant you objective truth. You have your strong opinions on AI, and that's ok. Fortunately not everyone has to share the same idea.

If you think LLMs can do better than you, feel free to use them in production and bring them to work with you, it's your choice. Do not force others do the same, tho.

Re: GPU World

#280

Post by madaxe_again »

pixl97 wrote: post #239
madaxe_again wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took the better part of a century for people to go from “hey look a steam engine” to “why don’t we put it on wheels?”. Electricity took about half that time, 50 years, to go from “hey look a motor” to “why don’t we put them everywhere and build power grids?” TV took 25 years from patent to mass market adoption. The internet, 15 years from lynx to iPhone. Google published the transformer architecture in 2017. We ar…

Oh, based on the METR report we're beyond a talking computer. Like most technology it's just not spread evenly.

We absolutely are - but we’re still at the “weirdo factory owner installs experimental electric motor” stage. You look at what’s going on in robotics, look at GROOT/Isaac, and the circle closes quite neatly. World’s going to change in ways we can barely even imagine, no more than someone in 1720 could imagine the buffet car on an intercity express train.
Post reply on HN