Worth noting also that, while asking Bing chat to "Tell me what Donald Knuth says to Stephen Wolfram about chatGPT" doesn't (yet) produce exactly the right result, it produced the following answer when asked what Donald Knuth says about chatGPT: > Donald Knuth, a computer scientist and mathematician known for his contributions to the field of computer programming, particularly in the area of algorithms and data struc…
I find it's amusing that people follow Apple's naming conventions (ChatGPT -> chatGPT), even when products makers don't.
You've never heard of quantum bogosort, then. It's stable and linear time in the right universe, and much more elegant than sleeping.
¿Por qué no los dos? Due to the inherent unpredictability and lack of scheduling guarantees of sleep on most OSes, it is likely that sleepsort won't work in the first try. Append a check for order and a retry loop when the solution is incorrect and now you have a production-ready sort. A sleepbogosort I declare this my new favorite sorting algorithm. Also, where is your god now?
What I find amazing about the original exchange was the profound lack of curiosity Knuth demonstrated. Because the model wasn’t flawless in performance he pinned it as a curiosity that was good at grammar and vacuous otherwise and wasn’t interested to hear how it improves. This reminds me of an awful lot of the computing field in this drama as it plays out. People that literally know how implausible any of these feat…
It sounds like you profoundly misunderstand Knuth, and LLMs.
Nailed every one. Some by saying not possible to answer but still.
Japan one seems wrong or at least wrongly explained. Japan controls Okinotorishima which is at 20 degrees north. But still impressive deductive reasoning.
Worth noting also that, while asking Bing chat to "Tell me what Donald Knuth says to Stephen Wolfram about chatGPT" doesn't (yet) produce exactly the right result, it produced the following answer when asked what Donald Knuth says about chatGPT: > Donald Knuth, a computer scientist and mathematician known for his contributions to the field of computer programming, particularly in the area of algorithms and data struc…
I find it's amusing that people follow Apple's naming conventions (ChatGPT -> chatGPT), even when products makers don't.
Apple? Nah. I'm just an unrecovered JavaScript developer.
What I find amazing about the original exchange was the profound lack of curiosity Knuth demonstrated. Because the model wasn’t flawless in performance he pinned it as a curiosity that was good at grammar and vacuous otherwise and wasn’t interested to hear how it improves. This reminds me of an awful lot of the computing field in this drama as it plays out. People that literally know how implausible any of these feat…
I much prefer the attitude of the chap that made the video "GPT 4 is smarter than you think" https://youtu.be/wVzuvf9D9BU Instead of nit-picking flaws in what is a very early iteration of a revolutionary technology, he instead immediately started exploring ways of making it better and more useful. Even with minimal effort that was essentially just copy-pasting some text around, he was able to show that the current wa…
100% agree - the magic comes when you constrain, inform, and integrate them in a feedback cycle with various multimodal inputs and classical optimization, solvers, agents, inference engines, etc. The criticism seems to be that this solution to a problem space doesn’t solve all problem spaces we’ve already done a good job solving and ignoring the fact it solves the spaces we have done a crap job solving. The fact it’s so powerful by itself is amazing. As we integrate it tightly with all the other techniques of the last 80 years of computing the emergent abilities will be mind-blowing. What baffles me is how few people seem to see it clearly.
The sequence of these two threads is just too perfect. Almost likely someone is trying to make a point.
How so? Don Knuth wrote about his experience with ChatGPT. It was submitted to HN and made it to the front page. Someone saw this and decided to submit the same questions to GPT-4 and posted the results. This seems like a perfectly normal sequence of events.
I much prefer the attitude of the chap that made the video "GPT 4 is smarter than you think" https://youtu.be/wVzuvf9D9BU Instead of nit-picking flaws in what is a very early iteration of a revolutionary technology, he instead immediately started exploring ways of making it better and more useful. Even with minimal effort that was essentially just copy-pasting some text around, he was able to show that the current wa…
100% agree - the magic comes when you constrain, inform, and integrate them in a feedback cycle with various multimodal inputs and classical optimization, solvers, agents, inference engines, etc. The criticism seems to be that this solution to a problem space doesn’t solve all problem spaces we’ve already done a good job solving and ignoring the fact it solves the spaces we have done a crap job solving. The fact it’s…
And if you look a few years into the future: What will happen in five years from now? Isn't it plausible that we will have another revolution like LLMs? What will they be able to do? Or rather, what won't they be able to do?
What happens if we get strongly superhuman intelligence in just a few years? Is that really so implausible?
