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

Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

grski.pl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 213 posts

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#151

Post by Jensson »

scotty79 wrote: post #122
Jensson wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People come up with stuff like this: https://i.redd.it/oenn6vi61ag21.png Or this: https://preview.redd.it/finally-made-my-scientist-species-to... Humans are capable of thinking and fleshing out novel concepts, current AI are not. Sure your first thing will greatly resemble current things, but as you iterate and get further and further away from existing things what you do stops being an imitation and starts being its…

Thanks for providing examples of combinations of things already seen.

I was dumb to even try, you would just say basically "that is a combination of red green and blue dots in a new pattern, not really novel!" regardless what it was.

The wealth of things you see around you doesn't exist in nature. Stick figures doesn't exist in nature, things in nature doesn't have black outlines yet we draw that everywhere in cartoons etc. Human have proven we have imagined many entirely novel things that doesn't exist in nature. And the creatures I posted have many aspects to them that are entirely unnatural, you clearly know that there are no animals like that even without knowing about all animals, so clearly they are something novel and not just more of the same.

Anyway, whenever you put yourself in a position where you can say "nuh uh, to me that isn't like that!" to everything, you are just tricking yourself when you do so.

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#152

Post by shinycode »

avereveard wrote: post #67
shinycode wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a spontaneous intelligence is 3 million times more efficient that one that one who took millions of hours of work from brains (there is so much effort that there is even more work put into AI that evolution who thinly spread changes through time, efforts diluted). We either have to define that AI will never be the same as HI and can’t compete with it or it’s of the same nature as some people say on HN and for me i…

Why? Nothing in the if sustain the conclusion. Also we did not emerge because of ourselves, so our intelligence cannot be postulated unique because of that. Absence of history is no proof either way, and we do have history of intelligence in other pila as well here in earth.

I input my comment in claude.ai, after refining the discussion with the other comments, Claude reached the conclusion :

« In conclusion, describing current AI systems as "intelligent" is indeed debatable. They are more accurately described as highly advanced information processing and content generation systems based on statistical models. The term "artificial intelligence" could be considered more of a marketing term or an aspirational goal rather than an accurate description of the current state of technology. »

The subterfuge, or advanced method of information processing, that is doing the magic for the debate to be possible is the transformers.

So the whole debate probably doesn’t make any sense in the first place because we can’t even define precisely intelligence in that context and there is a prism and we compare things that can’t and shouldn’t be compared in the first place

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#153

Post by Jensson »

Hasu wrote: post #149
Jensson wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that many calls indulging in food or bodily needs "play". Those are just core rewards, play is an active activity that is fun without being directly related to your survival, like eating is.

Eating ice cream instead of stale bread is absolutely play, just like running around on a soccer field is play even though running is a survival skill.

> Eating ice cream instead of stale bread is absolutely play

According to what definition? Play isn't indulgence, indulgence is a perfectly fine word and something completely different from play.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/play

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#154

Post by mirpa »

Kiro wrote: post #80
assimpleaspossi wrote: post #53

I don't care. I've come to the conclusion that gpt and gemini and all the others are nothing but conversational search engines. They can give me ideas or point me in the right direction but so do regular search engines. I like the conversation ability but, in the end, I cannot trust their results and still have to research further to decide for myself if their results are valid.

I can ask ChatGPT extremely specific programming questions and get working code solving it. This is not something I can do with a search engine. Another thing a search engine cannot do that I use ChatGPT for on a daily basis is taking unstructured text and convert it into a specified JSON format.

> I can ask ChatGPT extremely specific programming questions and get working code solving it.

I can do the opposite.

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#155

Post by avereveard »

shinycode wrote: post #152
avereveard wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Nothing in the if sustain the conclusion. Also we did not emerge because of ourselves, so our intelligence cannot be postulated unique because of that. Absence of history is no proof either way, and we do have history of intelligence in other pila as well here in earth.

I input my comment in claude.ai, after refining the discussion with the other comments, Claude reached the conclusion : « In conclusion, describing current AI systems as "intelligent" is indeed debatable. They are more accurately described as highly advanced information processing and content generation systems based on statistical models. The term "artificial intelligence" could be considered more of a marketing ter…

you entered your bias in a statistical parrot, and received your bias back

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#156

Post by pama »

cynusx wrote: post #31

The comparison doesn't really hold. He is comparing energy spend during inference in humans with energy spend during training in LLM's. Humans spend their lifetimes training their brain so one would have to sum up the total training time if you are going to compare it to the training time of LLM's. At age 30 the total energy use of the brain sums up to about 5000 Wh, which is 1440 times more efficient. But at age 30…

Thanks. So after your corrected energy estimate and more reasonable assumptions it appeaars that the clickbaity title of the article is off by more than 7 orders of magnitude. With the upcoming NVidia inference chips later this year it will be off by another log unit. It is hard for biomatter to compete with electrons in silicon and copper.

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#157

Post by Rinzler89 »

mirekrusin wrote: post #71
cynusx wrote: post #31

The comparison doesn't really hold. He is comparing energy spend during inference in humans with energy spend during training in LLM's. Humans spend their lifetimes training their brain so one would have to sum up the total training time if you are going to compare it to the training time of LLM's. At age 30 the total energy use of the brain sums up to about 5000 Wh, which is 1440 times more efficient. But at age 30…

Also you can't cp human brain.

The plot of The Matrix would beg to differ.

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#158

Post by swyx »

proneb1rd wrote: post #5

Call me lazy but I couldn’t get through the wall of text to learn what on earth vectored database is. Way too much effort spent talking about binary and how ascii works and whatnot - such basics that it feels that the article is for someone with zero knowledge about computers.

indeed. its condescending and word vomity. i would flag it except that it doesnt break any rules, it is just badly written. as the author acknowledges it is a 4hr stream of consciousness word dump. title is clickbait relative to what it is, a vector db review piece with a long preamble to puff himself up

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#159

Post by somenameforme »

moffkalast wrote: post #136
somenameforme wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These anthropomorphizations are increasingly absurd. There's a difference between a human making a mistake, and an AI arbitrarily and completely confidently creating entirely new code APIs, legal cases, or whatever that have absolutely no basis in reality whatsoever, beyond being what it thinks would be an appropriate next token based on what you're searching for. These error modes are simply in no way, whatsoever, c…

I mean I can definitely remember lots of cases for myself, in school especially, when I made the same mistake again repeatedly despite being corrected every time. I'm sure today's language models pale in comparison to your flawless genius, but you seriously underestimate the average person's idiocy. Agreed that the lack of some mid tier memory is definitely a huge problem, and the current solutions that try to addres…

It's not just this. LLMs can do nothing but predict the next token based on their training and current context window. You can try to do things like add 'fact databases' or whatever to stop them from saying so many absurd things, but the fact remains that the comparisons to human intelligence/learning remain completely inappropriate.

I think the most interesting thought experiment is to imagine an LLM trained on state of the art knowledge and technology at the dawn of humanity. Language didn't yet exist, slash 'em with the sharp part was cutting edge tech, and there was no entirely clear path forward. Yet we somehow went from that to putting a man on the Moon in what was basically a blink of the eye.

Yet the LLM? It's going to be stuck there basically unable to do anything, forever, until somebody gives it some new tokens to let it mix and match. Even if you tokenize the world to give it some sort of senses, it's going to be the exact same. Because no matter how much it tries to mix and match those tokens it's not going to be able to e.g. discover gravity.

It's the same reason why there are almost undoubtedly endless revolutionary and existence-altering discoveries ahead of us. Yet LLMs trained on essentially the entire written corpus of human knowledge? All they can do is provide basic mixing and matching of everything we already know, leaving it essentially frozen in time. Like we are as well currently, but we will break out. While the LLM will only move forward once we tell it what the next set of tokens to mix and match are.

Re: Why your brain is 3 milion more times efficient than GPT-4

#160

Post by thfuran »

wanderingmind wrote: post #46
cynusx wrote: post #31

The comparison doesn't really hold. He is comparing energy spend during inference in humans with energy spend during training in LLM's. Humans spend their lifetimes training their brain so one would have to sum up the total training time if you are going to compare it to the training time of LLM's. At age 30 the total energy use of the brain sums up to about 5000 Wh, which is 1440 times more efficient. But at age 30…

Not just that the brain of a newborn comes pretrained with billions of years of evolution. There is an energy cost associated with that which must be taken into account

Brains are only about half a billion years old.
Post reply on HN