21–30 of 86 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But was Microsoft ever cool in the sense that Google was circa 2005? (Asking honestly, I'm too young to remember that period.)
No. I'm an old-timer, and there has not been one picosecond since the moment of its founding when Microsoft was cool.
"Bard is much worse than ChatGPT at solving an obscure word game I invented" would have been a more honest title, but would probably generate less clicks for the author. Bard may still be much worse than ChatGPT at solving all kinds of puzzles, but the article is click bait for promoting the author's word game, not an actual investigation that warrants that conclusion.
what's wrong with that? the use of novel puzzles is frankly awesome because there's a much lower chance of contamination from previous puzzles so we get a chance to see how much generalization they've achieved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what's wrong with that? the use of novel puzzles is frankly awesome because there's a much lower chance of contamination from previous puzzles so we get a chance to see how much generalization they've achieved.
I'm complaining about the title writing a check that the blog post can't cash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
s/Microsoft/Google/ http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html
But was Microsoft ever cool in the sense that Google was circa 2005? (Asking honestly, I'm too young to remember that period.)
That's a clever game to get it to play. Today I asked ChatGPT to give me 1000 Fibonacci numbers starting with the 2000th number and it crashed. Later I asked it the same prompt and it repeatedly gave me code to calculate the Fibonacci numbers in Python.
That's a clever game to get it to play. Today I asked ChatGPT to give me 1000 Fibonacci numbers starting with the 2000th number and it crashed. Later I asked it the same prompt and it repeatedly gave me code to calculate the Fibonacci numbers in Python.
> and it crashed I hope you understand that it's only because of inability of OpenAI's servers to keep up with demand or some issue in their backend code - language models themselves can't "crash" like normal programs on some kind of input, because they "just" generate new tokens.
That is like saying the Excel document didn't crash, but Excel did when it tried to parse it. As far as I know there is no proof that you can't cause a LLM to crash with user input.
> because they "just" generate new tokens.
I can write a program that counts to 100 that crashes reliably.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and it crashed I hope you understand that it's only because of inability of OpenAI's servers to keep up with demand or some issue in their backend code - language models themselves can't "crash" like normal programs on some kind of input, because they "just" generate new tokens.
I know little more than what I've read about LLMs and other models. I just got it to do them again and it output them rather quickly: https://imgur.com/a/jfviCCe
If I understand how Large Language models work, they don't actually know about spelling.... they are given tokens that represent words, and can only infer things from the context of those tokens across terabytes of data that they're given. Any rhyming done is an impressive result.
It's so sad to me to see the downfall of google from the absolute coolest company on the planet to the one that's now trying to keep up.
s/Microsoft/Google/ http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html