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

GPT-4

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4

#111

Post by wolframhempel »

Atreiden wrote: post #37

I think it's interesting that they've benchmarked it against an array of standardized tests. Seems like LLMs would be particularly well suited to this kind of test by virtue of it being simple prompt:response, but I have to say...those results are terrifying. Especially when considering the rate of improvement. bottom 10% to top 10% of LSAT in What are the implications for society when general thinking, reading, and…

I like the accuracy score question on a philosophical level: If we assume absolute determinism - meaning that if you have complete knowledge of all things in the present universe and true randomness doesn't exist - then yes. Given a certain goal, there would be a knowable, perfect series of steps to advance you towards that goal and any other series of steps would have an accuracy score But having absolute knowledge of the present universe is much easier to do within the constrains of a chessboard than in the actual universe.

Re: GPT-4

#112

Post by arrosenberg »

_boffin_ wrote: post #70

This technology has been a true blessing to me. I have always wished to have a personal PhD in a particular subject whom I could ask endless questions until I grasped the topic. Thanks to recent advancements, I feel like I have my very own personal PhDs in multiple subjects, whom I can bombard with questions all day long. Although I acknowledge that the technology may occasionally produce inaccurate information, the…

I'm very excited for the future wave of confidently incorrect people powered by ChatGPT.

Re: GPT-4

#113

Post by erur »

gigel82 wrote: post #23

Wow, calculus from 1 to 4, and LeetCode easy from 12 to 31; at this rate, GPT-6 will be replacing / augmenting middle/high school teachers in most courses.

Public teachers and other bureaucrats are probably some of the last roles to be replaced. If any objective competence or system efficiency in general was the goal, the system would look vastly different.

Efficiency seeking players will adopt this quickly but self-sustaining bureaucracy has avoided most modernization successfully over the past 30 years - so why not also AI.

Re: GPT-4

#114

Post by aaroninsf »

ITT: de rigeur goalpost wrangling about AGI

AGI is a distraction.

The immediate problems are elsewhere: increasing agency and augmented intelligence are all that is needed to cause profound disequilibrium.

There are already clear and in-the-wild applications for surveillance, disinformation, data fabrication, impersonation... every kind of criminal activity.

Something to fear before AGI is domestic, state, or inter-state terrorism in novel domains.

A joke in my circles the last 72 hours? Bank Runs as a Service. Every piece exists today to produce reasonably convincing video and voice impersonations of panicked VC and dump them on now-unmanaged Twitter and TikTok.

If God-forbid it should ever come to cyberwarfare between China and US, control of TikTok is a mighty weapon.

Re: GPT-4

#115

Post by gus_massa »

gigel82 wrote: post #23

Wow, calculus from 1 to 4, and LeetCode easy from 12 to 31; at this rate, GPT-6 will be replacing / augmenting middle/high school teachers in most courses.

When I was young, vhs and crt were going to replace teachers. It didn't happen.

I work in math for the first year of the university in Argentina. We have non mandatory take home exercises in each class. If I waste 10 minutes writing them down in the blackboard instead of handing photocopies, I get like the double of answers by students. It's important that they write the answers and I can comment them, because otherwise they get to the midterms and can't write the answers correctly or they are just wrong and didn't notice. So I waste those 10 minutes. Humans are weird and for some task they like another human.

Re: GPT-4

#116

Post by andrepd »

Atreiden wrote: post #37

I think it's interesting that they've benchmarked it against an array of standardized tests. Seems like LLMs would be particularly well suited to this kind of test by virtue of it being simple prompt:response, but I have to say...those results are terrifying. Especially when considering the rate of improvement. bottom 10% to top 10% of LSAT in What are the implications for society when general thinking, reading, and…

Honestly this is not very surprising. Standardised testing is... well, standardised. You have huge model that learns the textual patterns in hundreds of thousands of test question/answer pairs. It would be surprising if it didn't perform as well as a human student with orders of magnitude less memory.

You can see the limitations by comparing e.g. a memorisation-based test (AP History) with one that actually needs abstraction and reasoning (AP Physics).

Re: GPT-4

#118

Post by peterlk »

Atreiden wrote: post #37

I think it's interesting that they've benchmarked it against an array of standardized tests. Seems like LLMs would be particularly well suited to this kind of test by virtue of it being simple prompt:response, but I have to say...those results are terrifying. Especially when considering the rate of improvement. bottom 10% to top 10% of LSAT in What are the implications for society when general thinking, reading, and…

Life and chess are not the same. I would argue that this is showing a fault in standardized testing. It’s like asking humans to do square roots in an era of calculators. We will still need people who know how to judge the accuracy of calculated roots, but the job of calculating a square root becomes a calculator’s job. The upending of industries is a plausibility that needs serious discussion. But human life is not a min-maxed zero-sum game like chess is. Things will change, and life will go on.

To address your specific comments:

> What are the implications for society when general thinking, reading, and writing becomes like Chess?

This is a profound and important question. I do think that by “general thinking” you mean “general reasoning”.

> What happens when ALL of our decisions can be assigned an accuracy score?

This requires a system where all human’s decisions are optimized against a unified goal (or small set of goals). I don’t think we’ll agree on those goals any time soon.

Re: GPT-4

#119

Post by jadbox »

nickrubin wrote: post #58

This is huge: "Rather than the classic ChatGPT personality with a fixed verbosity, tone, and style, developers (and soon ChatGPT users) can now prescribe their AI’s style and task by describing those directions in the 'system' message."

Can you describe this little more? I'm not sure exactly what this means.

Re: GPT-4

#120

Post by yoyohello13 »

_boffin_ wrote: post #70

This technology has been a true blessing to me. I have always wished to have a personal PhD in a particular subject whom I could ask endless questions until I grasped the topic. Thanks to recent advancements, I feel like I have my very own personal PhDs in multiple subjects, whom I can bombard with questions all day long. Although I acknowledge that the technology may occasionally produce inaccurate information, the…

If you don't know the subject, how can you be sure what it's telling you is true? Do you vet what ChatGPT tells you with other sources?

I don't really know Typescript, so I've been using it a lot to supplement my learning, but I find it really hard to accept any of its answers that aren't straight code examples I can test.

Post reply on HN