Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GPT-4

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4

#431

Post by cypress66 »

la64710 wrote: post #140

It is amazing how this crowd in HN reacts to AI news coming out of OpenAI compared to other competitors like Google or FB. Today there was another news about Google releasing their AI in GCP and mostly the comments were negative. The contrast is clearly visible and without any clear explanation for this difference I have to suspect that maybe something is being artificially done to boost one against the other.

Google's announcement is almost irrelevant. PaLM already has a paper, so it's not new, and there isn't even a wait list to use it, so the announcement is pretty moot.

Meta's llama has been thoroughly discussed so I'm not sure what you mean.

Re: GPT-4

#432

Post by ihucos »

We have a new Apple releasing their new iPhones to a crowd in awe. Only that now it's actually serious.

Re: GPT-4

#433

Post by paulpan »

serjester wrote: post #221

Seems like OpenAI is forecasting massive changes to the job market. I highly recommend reading page 18 of the research paper. "GPT-4 or subsequent models may lead to the automation of certain jobs.[81] This could result in workforce displacement.[82] Over time, we expect GPT-4 to impact even jobs that have historically required years of experience and education, such as legal services.[83]"

Point well taken, but that page also reads akin to a disclaimer for legal shielding purposes.

Haven't we heard this narrative before with other disruptive technologies such as self-driving technology? No one doubts the potential changes wrought by GPT-4 but it's a long, rocky road ahead. Protectionism policies created by governments are already coming to the forefront, like ChatGPT being banned in NYC schools.

Overall it seems GPT-4 is an incremental upgrade to GPT-3.5 and not a major jump between GPT-2 vs. GPT-3. We might have to wait until GPT-6 to see these forecasted workforce displacement changes to affect en-masse.

Re: GPT-4

#434

Post by LesZedCB »

Imnimo wrote: post #218

A class of problem that GPT-4 appears to still really struggle with is variants of common puzzles. For example: >Suppose I have a cabbage, a goat and a lion, and I need to get them across a river. I have a boat that can only carry myself and a single other item. I am not allowed to leave the cabbage and lion alone together, and I am not allowed to leave the lion and goat alone together. How can I safely get all three…

it took two corrections but it did get the correct answer the third time.

Re: GPT-4

#436

Post by tomp »

rmorey wrote: post #273
Imnimo wrote: post #218

A class of problem that GPT-4 appears to still really struggle with is variants of common puzzles. For example: >Suppose I have a cabbage, a goat and a lion, and I need to get them across a river. I have a boat that can only carry myself and a single other item. I am not allowed to leave the cabbage and lion alone together, and I am not allowed to leave the lion and goat alone together. How can I safely get all three…

the "trick" Monty Hall problems are another good one here: https://twitter.com/colin_fraser/status/1628461980645462016 Apparently GPT-4 gets this one right!

GPT-4 gets it.

https://twitter.com/tomprimozic/status/1635720278578692152

Re: GPT-4

#437

Post by killerstorm »

BoiledCabbage wrote: post #255
Imnimo wrote: post #218

A class of problem that GPT-4 appears to still really struggle with is variants of common puzzles. For example: >Suppose I have a cabbage, a goat and a lion, and I need to get them across a river. I have a boat that can only carry myself and a single other item. I am not allowed to leave the cabbage and lion alone together, and I am not allowed to leave the lion and goat alone together. How can I safely get all three…

It's a good observation. Although on the flip side, I almost went to type up a reply to you explaining why you were wrong and why bringing the goat first is the right solution. Until I realized I misread what your test was when I skimmed your comment. Likely the same type of mistake GPT-4 made when "seeing" it. Intuitively, I think the answer is that we do have two types of thinking. The pattern matching fast thinkin…

> The pattern matching fast thinking, and the systematic analytical thinking. It seems clear to me that LLMs will be the solution to enabling the first type of thinking.

If you want the model to solve a non-trivial puzzle, you need it to "unroll" it's thinking. E.g. ask it to translate the puzzle into a formal language (e.g. Prolog) and then solve it formally. Or, at least, some chain-of-thought.

FWIW auto-formalization was already pretty good with GPT-3-level models which aren't specifically trained for it. GPT-4 might be on a wholly new level.

> But it's unclear to me if advanced LLMs will ever handling the second type

Well, just asking model directly exercises only a tiny fraction of its capabilities, so almost certainly LLMs can be much better at systematic thinking.

Re: GPT-4

#438

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o »

lionkor wrote: post #95

I cant wait for this to do targeted censorship! It already demonstrates it has strong biases deliberately programmed in: > I cannot endorse or promote smoking, as it is harmful to your health. But it would likely happily promote or endorse driving, skydiving, or eating manure - if asked in the right way.

Read it again. That's the old model they're comparing it to.

Re: GPT-4

#439

Post by sinuhe69 »

hathawsh wrote: post #237

It astonishes me that we've reached almost exactly the type of artificial intelligence used by the fictional computers in Star Trek: The Next Generation. I didn't think that would happen in my lifetime. What's next?!

If the Star Trek computer hallucinated like ChatGPT, Captain Picard and his crew would end up inside a star long ago!
Post reply on HN