371–380 of 546 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re prescribing elegance to a stochastic generator trained on the wealth of humanity, including 4chan. Let’s set our expectations a bit.
Your brain is a stochastic generator. Have you read 4chan?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s possible, but there’s a difference between vastness and difficulty. Humans can’t compete with AIs on vastness of material they are familiar with, or the depth of effort they are willing and able to throw at a problem. But scale isn’t the only aspect of difficult scientific endeavours. There’s also theory. And advancements sometimes come through hard graft of knotting together many things. And sometimes they come…
I don't think that's true. Human intelligence is limited, and our brains are inefficient machines. The tools we built to replace muscles have mostly obsoleted raw strength for tasks like excavating earth. There's no reason to think we can't do the same for brains. And then we'll never need to think for a living again. Some people may want to do it as a commercially insignificant hobby, of course, the way people lift…
If there is no training data or data in the context that leads it to the correct result then it can't do it, whereas a human seems to be able to generalize and abstract a goal and then repeat an action or thought process in a 'recursive' manner to reach the result. AFAIK LLMs don't do this.
Just as an example to illustrate. I recently asked an LLM to organize a bunch of artists albums into whether they were released by a major label or an independent label, and for the most part it did a good job. But there were albums that it classified as independendent that weren't. I presume because it either didn't run into the right data when searching or it misunderstood the data it did find. A human would not do this because if a human had a list of all major labels, it could instantly detect whether an album was or wasn't indie, because it doesn't do any complicated parsing or token probabilities that LLMs do, it just recognizes a pattern (either an album is indie or it is not, a human brain needs simply one piece of information to decide this), an LLM is not that simple.
In a way human brains are simpler than LLMs. The algorithms it runs mentally can detect a piece of information and then see most / all of the consequences of that information whereas an LLM thrawls through megabytes of text and does a token probability distribution and so on without any simplicity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ever heard of string theory. People go whole lives without being able to make it pan out.
String theory is a great example of a dead end kept alive by ego and sunk cost fallacy. An AI would have declared it dead and moved on 10 years earlier.
> String theory is a great example of a dead end kept alive by ego and sunk cost fallacy. An AI would have declared it dead and moved on 10 years earlier.
Not only are LLMs perfect machines with all the intelligence of humanity without any of our problems, they are also everything else. I wait to get my hands on one of those LLMs people on hn seem to be using. I want to believe too. Let me into the religion of the perfect thinking machine gods.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are not understanding what humanoid robots are about. Those are specialist robots you are describing. The promise is of course one robot that can do the plumbing, clean your house, do the dishes, build a house, and basically every physical job a human can do. It's extreme lly likely that at least a somewhat humanoid shape is required for that.
My octopus will outperform your humanoid by doing the dishes, fixing the plumbing, and preparing a Caesar salad, all at the same time!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humanoid robots are obviously more than marketing. The entirety of human civilization is human shaped. Making robots that are human shaped is easier and more efficient than redesigning and rebuilding everything that exists.
Outside of sci-fi, marketing proposals, and niches like "Elder care in Japan" there are very few humanoid robots. By contrast non-humanoid robots have been mass produced and used in industry for decades. Arms. Carts. Trollies. No people. If you want something with fine motor control and dexterity, it's easier to make that the robot and then have another robot bring the workpiece to the arm than it is to build a singl…
The 2030s have some bad news for us...
The problem with this is there is going to be a bug that needs fixing that the LM can't fix and if the humans can't understand the bug that we're just gonna have to live with the bug! But let's not talk about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might benefit from (proper, not the multiple choice kind) aptitude testing.
What are the benefits? What would/could I do with the results?
It's probably worth checking the site history before posting. The guy who wrote this looks like some kind of "race science" crackpot.