121–130 of 149 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I love chatGPT for information lookup (while knowing that it hallucinates) Hallucinates? I'd use the term 'bullshits' when it doesn't know the right answer. This makes it a dangerous thing to trust.
People bullshit all the time, convincingly. Somehow, we get by.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I love chatGPT for information lookup (while knowing that it hallucinates) Hallucinates? I'd use the term 'bullshits' when it doesn't know the right answer. This makes it a dangerous thing to trust.
You should trust it as much as you'd trust another human. The quality of the LLM matters. The better LLMs don't hallucinate as much as the rest. ChatGPT-4 appears to be trained to consult the web when it receives questions for which it's likely to hallucinate, such as questions about hard figures.
Eh? Only a sociopath, when confronted with a question they don't know the answer to, confidently makes something up. The human may not know the answer, but they generally know whether they know the answer or not. The machine does not (of course, it doesn't _know_ anything). You should absolutely trust something less than this far less than the average human.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it is a pop how can Big Tech walk it back? Am I overreacting here or have companies like Google and Microsoft pimped out their reputations in an irreversible fashion?
None of the big players have staked reputation on AI yet at all, which is telling in its own way. They've invested in it and explored products and demonstrated their R&D commitment but they haven't made it their new brand identity or anything. The most vulnerable Big Tech organization are the ones like OpenAI and Anthropic that are swollen with investment specifically for AI but need to find a business or growth plan…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It certainly feels like the AI bubble is popping. Objectively, no it doesn't. Even if you think it's a bubble, then the bubble is just growing. There are zero signs of anything popping yet. Company valuations are only increasing. > Nvidia as the most valuable company in the world? It makes sense when you look at the financials. It's like back in 1800's when railroads were the new thing, and imagine there were only…
> Objectively, no it doesn't. Even if you think it's a bubble, then the bubble is just growing. There are zero signs of anything popping yet. Ever seen a bubble pop? It doesn't contract and then pop, usually. A hole develops, and almost immediately no more bubble. If you watch very closely, you might see signs of the end a fraction of a second before it vanishes. Like, this is why these phenomena are called bubbles;…
There's no "it feels like it's popping".
The bubble is just continuing to grow. When it pops, you'll know it.
(Although to be fair, it's not instant. It's often a jagged decline that takes weeks or even months. You never know when you've hit the bottom, when it's "fully popped". So the metaphor with actual physical bubbles is not perfect. But in hindsight you can often look back to a day of massive selling that "started" it.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of the big players have staked reputation on AI yet at all, which is telling in its own way. They've invested in it and explored products and demonstrated their R&D commitment but they haven't made it their new brand identity or anything. The most vulnerable Big Tech organization are the ones like OpenAI and Anthropic that are swollen with investment specifically for AI but need to find a business or growth plan…
I’m not sure how Google and Meta placing massive AI visibility in their everyday user interfaces isn’t staking reputation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you disagree with yourself? How is Apple AI not using ChatGPT if Siri uses ChatGPT? You said it yourself. Heck, Apple said it themselves. The fact that there is a prompt asking for permission doesn't change that. Maybe some parts of the AI in iPhone don't use ChatGPT but others do, as advertised. > Apple Intelligence doesn't use OpenAI at all. Siri and writing tools can tap into ChatGPT to compose text, e.g.…
Apple Intelligence is run on-device and on Apple's Private Cloud Compute, it does not use OpenAI. Apple also allows ChatGPT (and later other models) to be called directly from Siri and writing tools, in cases where Apple Intellgence can't solve the task. That is for example for when some text should be composed, like a story or recipe. Nothing about this contradicts with what I have written previously.
"Apple Intelligence" is a strange marketing driven name because it implies to the tech naive that all AI in an iPhone is offline.
When in fact "Apple Intelligence" is just the name for some of the AI functionalities in Apple devices. Some functionalities will still send data to ChatGPT and perhaps other third party providers in the future.
But Apple gets to advertise "Apple Intelligence" as privacy conscious, offline, personal AI and still be technically correct. Classic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple Intelligence is run on-device and on Apple's Private Cloud Compute, it does not use OpenAI. Apple also allows ChatGPT (and later other models) to be called directly from Siri and writing tools, in cases where Apple Intellgence can't solve the task. That is for example for when some text should be composed, like a story or recipe. Nothing about this contradicts with what I have written previously.
Yeah so it seems we agree, Apple resorts to third party AI for some tasks. "Apple Intelligence" is a strange marketing driven name because it implies to the tech naive that all AI in an iPhone is offline. When in fact "Apple Intelligence" is just the name for some of the AI functionalities in Apple devices. Some functionalities will still send data to ChatGPT and perhaps other third party providers in the future. But…
Anyway, ChatGPT was a very small portion of the Apple Intelligence demo. The significant majority of the functionality they showed (all the non-ChatGPT stuff) was on-device or in Apple's Private Cloud Compute, the privacy story for which is quite good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah so it seems we agree, Apple resorts to third party AI for some tasks. "Apple Intelligence" is a strange marketing driven name because it implies to the tech naive that all AI in an iPhone is offline. When in fact "Apple Intelligence" is just the name for some of the AI functionalities in Apple devices. Some functionalities will still send data to ChatGPT and perhaps other third party providers in the future. But…
It's very clear when ChatGPT gets involved - you get a prompt asking you if you want to send the query to ChatGPT ("ChatGPT" being referred to by name). There's no feasible way to have your data sent to ChatGPT unintentionally. Anyway, ChatGPT was a very small portion of the Apple Intelligence demo. The significant majority of the functionality they showed (all the non-ChatGPT stuff) was on-device or in Apple's Priva…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see things at a slightly different angle than you. Yes, there's a bubble. Those things you list, I find it very easy to believe they add up to at least 3% productivity boost globally. A single tech doing this in one year (or even 18 months) before we really understand how to best apply it, is a radical change all by itself, even if we don't use it to speed up future growth. The world economy is $109 trillion; 3% of…
> Code completion is a great use, some writing tools are nice, I love chatGPT for information lookup (while knowing that it hallucinates), ChatGPT/whatever is great for generating icons and some images, and it’s much better at writing in corpo than I am. I find it incredibly hard to believe that these things provide value anywhere close to 3% of GDP, that estimate is orders of magnitude too high. 3% is the entire eco…
I can't find out how many copy editors and copy writers there are in the world (I keep finding numbers for the USA alone).
I don't know how many graphical artists there are, nor how many are willing to use the various image generator AI, but I am seeing that stuff pop up IRL.
We know at least some lawyers have used it because they didn't check the output for hallucinations and it bit them hard; we don't know how many use it carefully.