231–240 of 280 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just wait a couple of years. You are not thinking fourth-dimensionally.
I think I agree with you. Who could predict the functionality of the iPhone 14 from the iPod and the Blackberry?
So, your mileage may vary
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>until people realize GPT-3 will generate answers that are demonstrably wrong It isn't like google never returns the wrong answer
Almost all the GPT answers shown in the thread are subtly incorrect, if not outright false. The brainfuck program is utter nonsense. Conversely, I can expect Google's answers to be passable most of the time.
I work at Alphabet and I recently went to an internal tech talk about deploying large language models like this at Google. As a disclaimer I'll first note that this is not my area of expertise, I just attended the tech talk because it sounded interesting. Large language models like GPT are one of the biggest areas of active ML research at Google, and there's a ton of pretty obvious applications for how they can be us…
This is so true. Some folks in Ads also tried to explore using large language models (one example: LLM is going to be the ultimate solution for contextual targeting if it's properly done), but one of the major bottleneck is always its cost and latency. Even if you can afford cpu/gpu/tpu costs, you always have to play within a finite latency budget. Large language model often adds latency by order of seconds, not even…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
or you could just log in and not have to worry about it
You know twitter requires a phone number now right? I don't have a Twitter account because I don't use twitter. Why do you assume a a closed off platform so accessible to everyone?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a simple example: the brainfuck example ( https://twitter.com/jdjkelly/status/1598063705471995904 ) is just entirely wrong, full stop. The comments do not match the code, and the algorithm is fractally wrong. Some examples: the algorithm does not perform variable-distance moves so it can’t actually handle arrays; the comparison test is just entirely wrong and performs only a decrement; the code that claims to copy…
...but it appears to be correct, as long as you glance at it (and don't have the time and/or expertise to actually read it). We're clearly in the phase of society where "Appearance of Having" is all that matters. > The spectacle is the inverted image of society in which relations between commodities have supplanted relations between people, in which "passive identification with the spectacle supplants genuine activit…
This has always been the case in any society to be honest. I'm sure even Plato was writing about it back in the day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea that LLMs will kill Google seems to me completely absurd. Name any other organization as well-positioned to create and exploit LLMs.
I'm also largely skeptical of the claim that Google is going to completely drop the ball here, but this is classic Innovator's Dilemma - sometimes a business can't effectively segment their existing customers enough to introduce a higher initial cost but ultimately better technology. I think a Google Search Premium that cost $50/month would go over pretty poorly with Google's existing customer base (advertisers), but…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just tried Googling "when did the moon explode?" to see if it still gave authoritative answers to bogus questions: > About an hour after sunset on June 18, 1178, the Moon exploded. "when did lincoln shoot booth" > April 14, 1865 Mostly they seem to catch and stop this now, but there was a fun brief period where it was popping up the fact-box for whatever seemed closest to the search terms, so "when did neil armstro…
"Tell me more about your cousins," Rorschach sent. "Our cousins lie about the family tree," Sascha replied, "with nieces and nephews and Neandertals. We do not like annoying cousins." "We'd like to know about this tree." Sascha muted the channel and gave us a look that said Could it be any more obvious ? "It couldn't have parsed that. There were three linguistic ambiguities in there. It just ignored them." "Well, it…
This is an enormously updated Eliza. Its usefulness is predicated upon its training corpus but because our corpus ingestion sizes are so large today it becomes a qualitatively different experience when searching on information that has already been generated.
However, synthesizing or inferring new conclusions from existing information still is our leg work to perform.
I found that StackOverflow type questions work quite well. Breaking down research paper text filled with lingo I'm not familiar with works well. Threading James Burke-Connections-like insight comprehensions among information in front of me though, is still on me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm also largely skeptical of the claim that Google is going to completely drop the ball here, but this is classic Innovator's Dilemma - sometimes a business can't effectively segment their existing customers enough to introduce a higher initial cost but ultimately better technology. I think a Google Search Premium that cost $50/month would go over pretty poorly with Google's existing customer base (advertisers), but…
I mean, they’re already using LLMs. Namely, BERT.
It's great, until people realize GPT-3 will generate answers that are demonstrably wrong. (And to make matters worse, can't show/link the source of the incorrect information!)
Exactly, i talked to ChatGPT and it gave me a lot of wrong information in an authorative tone. I consider it dangerous as-is.