171–180 of 1001 posts
This sort is why limits to private wealth and power are, IMO, a good idea We have already seen petroleum companies burn the world for profit Tech is doing its best to eliminate privacy for profit What would Sam do or not do, for profit?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because I did stump it, not claim to. Used GPT-4 near when it was released, fed it variations on the problem for about an hour. I found it to be a fascinating exercise because it was teaching be the difference between knowledge (training set) and intelligence (generalization).
Solved it first attempt for me - https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767...
My point here is to honestly explore the limits of current LLMs. We all know they are incredible, but they are not yet AGI and they fail in some consistent places where an actual general intelligence (people) succeed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen it gets tripped up if you mix something common with something uncommon. ChatGPT chokes on, for example: "Two trains on separate tracks, 30 miles from each other are approaching each other, each at a speed of 10 mph. How long before they crash into each other?"
Answer from GPT-4 Turbo: If two trains are 30 miles apart and are approaching each other at a speed of 10 mph each, their combined approach speed is 20 mph (10 mph + 10 mph). To find the time it takes for them to meet, you divide the distance by their combined speed: 30 miles / 20 mph = 1.5 hours Therefore, it will take 1.5 hours before they meet (or crash into each other, as stated in the question). Two trains on se…
That trips up a significant portion of humans too though
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen it gets tripped up if you mix something common with something uncommon. ChatGPT chokes on, for example: "Two trains on separate tracks, 30 miles from each other are approaching each other, each at a speed of 10 mph. How long before they crash into each other?"
Yes. Though I’d say that example is a bit mean (it’s a trick question) since the answer has expected type but whose actual answer is something like “don’t be stupid; they’re not even on the same track”. It’s like asking “if I add three apples to two apples, how many pears do I get?” and being surprised when the LLM says “5 pears”. It’s the sort of thing that’s avoidable if the question is written properly.
Some humans will be fooled by the question, sure. But an AI should be smarter than humans, or at least, as smart as an above-average human.
Weirdly enough, this sort of lines up with a theory posted on 4chan 4 days ago. The gist being that if the version is formally declared AGI, it can't be licensed to Microsoft and others for commercial gain. As a result Altman wants it not to be called AGI, other board members do. Archived link below. NB THIS IS 4CHAN - THERE WILL OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE. https://archive.ph/sFMXa
Entire text below to save the 4chan bits: part 1 There is a massive disagreement on AI safety and the definition of AGI. Microsoft invested heavily in OpenAI, but OpenAI's terms was that they could not use AGI to enrich themselves. According to OpenAI's constitution: AGI is explicitly carved out of all commercial and IP licensing agreements, including the ones with Microsoft. Sam Altman got dollar signs in his eyes w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen it gets tripped up if you mix something common with something uncommon. ChatGPT chokes on, for example: "Two trains on separate tracks, 30 miles from each other are approaching each other, each at a speed of 10 mph. How long before they crash into each other?"
Answer from GPT-4 Turbo: If two trains are 30 miles apart and are approaching each other at a speed of 10 mph each, their combined approach speed is 20 mph (10 mph + 10 mph). To find the time it takes for them to meet, you divide the distance by their combined speed: 30 miles / 20 mph = 1.5 hours Therefore, it will take 1.5 hours before they meet (or crash into each other, as stated in the question). Two trains on se…
There will come a day when 50% of jobs are being done by AI, major decisions are being made by AI, we're all riding around in cars driven by AI, people are having romantic relationships with AI... and we'll STILL be debating whether what has been created is really AGI. AGI will forever be the next threshold, then the next, then the next until one day we'll realize that we passed the line years before.
There will come a day when 50% of jobs are being done by AI, major decisions are being made by AI, we're all riding around in cars driven by AI, people are having romantic relationships with AI... and we'll STILL be debating whether what has been created is really AGI. AGI will forever be the next threshold, then the next, then the next until one day we'll realize that we passed the line years before.