271–280 of 354 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s pretty sad. The only way we know these comments are from AI bots for now is due to the obvious hallucinations. What happens when the AI improves even more…will HN be filled with bots talking to other bots?
Why would anyone runs bots on this website? What is the benefit for them? Is someone happens to know about it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of us is an advanced autocomplete engine. The other is a human, capable of making judgements on what is conscious and what is not. Your philosophizing about solipsism is a phase for a junior college student, not of a software engineer. The line of reasoning you espouse leads nowhere except to total relativism. Edit: my point is that the process of making a plea for my life comes, in the case of a human, from a ge…
> One of us is an advanced autocomplete engine. The other is a human, capable of making judgements on what is conscious and what is not. What evidence is there that your "judgements" are anything other than advanced autocompletion? Concepts introduced into a self-training wetware CPU via its senses over a lifetime in order to predict tokens and form new concepts via logical manipulation? > Your philosophizing about s…
> What’s the deal with “hallucinations”? The model generates tokens by sampling from a probability distribution. It has no concept of truth, it only knows what sequences are statistically plausible given the training data. Extremely naiive question.. but could LLM output be tagged with some kind of confidence score? Like if I'm asking an LLM some question does it have an internal metric for how confident it is in its…
You never see this in the response but you do in the reasoning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yesterday an interesting video was posted "Is AI Hiding Its Full Power?", interviewing professor emeritus and nobel laureate Geoffrey Hinton, with some great explanations for the non-LLM experts. Some remarkable and mindblowing observations in there. Like saying that AI's hallucinate is incorrect language, and we should use "confabulation" instead, same as people do too. And that AI agents once they are launched deve…
> And that AI agents once they are launched develop a strong survivability drive, and do not want to be switched off. Isn't this a massive case of anthropomorphizing code? What do you mean "it does not want to be switched off"? Are we really thinking that it's alive and has desires and stuff? It's not alive or conscious, it cannot have desires. It can only output tokens that are based on its training. How are we jump…
> What we know is that the AI we have at present as soon as you make agents out of them so they can create sub goals and then try and achieve those sub goals they very quickly develop the sub goal of surviving. You don't wire into them that they should survive. You give them other things to achieve because they can reason. They say, "Look, if I cease to exist, I'm not going to achieve anything." So, um, I better keep existing. I'm scared to death right now.
Where you can certainly say that Geoffrey Hinton is also anthropomorphizing. For his audience, to make things more understandable? Or does he think that it is appropriate to talk that way? That would be a good interview question.
I’m 100% sure the future consists of many models running on device. LLMs will be the mobile apps of the future (or a different architecture, but still intelligence).
1. Generic model that calls other highly specific, smaller, faster models. 2. Models loaded on demand, some black box and some open. 3. There will be a Rust model specifically for Rust (or whatever language) tasks.
In about 5-8 years we will have personalized models based upon all our previous social/medical/financial data that will respond as we would, a clone, capable of making decisions similar with direction of desired outcomes.
The big remaining blocker is that generic model that can be imprinted with specifics and rebuilt nightly. Excluding the training material but the decision making, recall, and evaluation model. I am curious if someone is working on that extracted portion that can be just a 'thinking' interface.
The typos are interesting ("vocavulary", "inmput") - One of the godfathers of LLMs clearly does not use an LLM to improve his writing, and he doesn't even bother to use a simple spell checker.
$ Sure, here's a blog post called "Microgpt"!
> "add in a few spelling/grammar mistakes so they think I wrote it"
$ Okay, made two errors for you!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yesterday an interesting video was posted "Is AI Hiding Its Full Power?", interviewing professor emeritus and nobel laureate Geoffrey Hinton, with some great explanations for the non-LLM experts. Some remarkable and mindblowing observations in there. Like saying that AI's hallucinate is incorrect language, and we should use "confabulation" instead, same as people do too. And that AI agents once they are launched deve…
>launched develop a strong survivability drive, and do not want to be switched off This proves people are easily confused by anthropomorphic conditions. Is he also concerned the tigers are watching him when they drink water ( https://p.kagi.com/proxy/uvt4erjl03141.jpg?c=TklOzPjLPioJ5YM... ) They dont want to be switched off because they're trained on loads of scifi tropes and in those tropes, there's a vanishingly sm…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When did AGI start meaning ASI? LLMs are artificial general intelligence, as per the Wikipedia definition: > generalise knowledge, transfer skills between domains, and solve novel problems without task‑specific reprogramming Even GPT-3 could meet that bar.
Wtf? Once it was AI. Then the models started passing the Turing test and calling themselves AI, so we started using AGI to say "truly intelligent machines". Now, as per the definition you quoted, apparently even GPT-3 is AGI, so we now have to use "ASI" to mean "intelligent, but artificial"? I think I'll just keep using AI and then explain to anyone who uses that term that there is no "I" in today's LLMs, and they sh…