[deleted]
ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
51–60 of 85 posts
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#52> Models don’t understand anything Are people really so unaware of themselves? What is understanding? I'm not going to even attempt to define that, but I will posit that the only way we have of verifying understanding, regardless of what definition you use, is validating the correct output for a given input. For instance, when we teach children, we validate their understanding by giving them a test. Are we able to lo…
I'm pretty sure that ChatGPT doesn't "understand" things as humans do. But does it mean that it has no ability to understand things? For example, assume there is an alien species that can only see ultraviolet, but not any other lightwave in human's visual spectrum. They don't "see" things as humans do. But we'll still consider they to have ability to see things.
Philosophically, it matters whether LLMs understand something or merely act like they do. Practically, it doesn’t matter.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#53I agree, but that doesn't make it any less amazing.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do! So long as we don’t appeal to consciousness as the basis for understanding but measure it with benchmarks, LLMs understand many things. Maetschke, S., Iraola, D. M., Barnard, P., Shafiei Bavani, E., Zhong, P., Xu, Y., & Yepes, A. J. (2021). Understanding in artificial intelligence. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.06573.
I saw this example on Twitter today which shows ChatGPT doesn't understand: Mike's mother had 4 kids; 3 of them are named Luis, Drake and Matilda. What is the name of the 4th kid? I'm sorry, but I don't have information about the fourth kid. The information you provided is that Mike's mother has 4 kids, and three of them are named Luis, Drake, and Matilda. However, the name of the fourth child is not specified in the…
It doesn't show it doesn't understand. It shows that if it is capable of understanding, it's reasoning skills in some areas lag its language, and that is confusing to us. Plenty of people would fail to answer that riddle without prompting, but they'd likely answer in simpler language, and so we would evaluate them accordingly.
I asked it a bunch of riddles yesterday, and it failed to get many at first, until I led it through parts of the reasoning the way you'd lead a child.
E.g "you leave your camp, go 3 miles south, 3 miles east, 3 miles north, and find a bear in your tent. What colour is the bear?" At first it said it couldn't tell. I then asked it where the tent must be for the description to be true, and it correctly answered the North pole. I then asked what colour the bear must then be, and it correctly got the answer.
If I had to lead a child through it like that, my reaction would not be that the child can't understand. But when ChatGPT responds in formal, adult language it makes it hard to give it the same benefit of the doubt.
I don't know how much we can say that it actually understand, but I also think it's too easy to dismiss it like that. It is also too easy to assume based on other examples that it is "smarter" than it is.
Accurately evaluating understanding is hard especially because it's ability to solve problems is "lopsided" - it's unusual to be this dumb while at the same time being so eloquent and "well read".
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#55Someone page DesCartes. How do I know everyone in the world is actually real, actual intelligences and consciousnesses distinct from my own? All these articles lack a severe lack of imagination or just try to apply a very narrow definition of intelligence. It's good to be grounded and not hop on every bandwagon but to deride ChatGpt because it can't convince the author it is mimicking the way we think we think is a b…
your experience absolutely matches mine with the getting started hurdle. and yeah i just subscribed today
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw this example on Twitter today which shows ChatGPT doesn't understand: Mike's mother had 4 kids; 3 of them are named Luis, Drake and Matilda. What is the name of the 4th kid? I'm sorry, but I don't have information about the fourth kid. The information you provided is that Mike's mother has 4 kids, and three of them are named Luis, Drake, and Matilda. However, the name of the fourth child is not specified in the…
I had to read that 3-4 times before I understood that it was a riddle. So I put it in GPT3–and it got the answer right away: “Mike's mother had 4 kids; 3 of them are named Luis, Drake and Matilda. What is the name of the 4th kid? The fourth kid is Mike. ” So, maybe they just needed to try again.
It's not a riddle because the answer is plain to anyone who understands English. I'm not saying you don't but the answer is right there.
I asked it a followup:
The name of the 4th child is in the question
Ah, I see! My apologies for missing that. In that case, the name of the fourth child is Mike.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
“development on this model will not lead to General Intelligence, which is not a data training/stat problem altogether” Why is everyone so damn sure about this? Not to pick on you—I’ve read so many self-backpatting comments that feel the need to reassuringly say something like: “we all know this isn’t AGI and couldn’t possibly be and won’t lead to it.” I don’t think this is so clear cut.
It is because of alan turing. The turing test has arbitrarily put the bar at “must successfully emulate a human being to be labeled general intelligence”. I don’t find the turing test useful at all as a benchmark. We don’t need something to successfully emulate a human to do useful intelligent work. ChatGPT can already do that work in many domains and many languages, if working as an assistant to a human. I honestly…
I can see why not believing Turing Test is a useful benchmark means that you can't deduce ChatGPT is sentient from it being able to pass one. But how do you deduce it is not AGI without some other reasonable benchmark? Moreover, how can you deduce GPT-4 can't spontaneously become one even in principle without having that benchmark? Those two are the questions to the skeptics really.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#58have people not seen the videos of Gato? it's pretty mind blowing. it's ability is beyond belief, and it's not even the scaled up version, since there have been clear demonstrations that scaling improves model performance.
to me, Gato is pure proof that tranformers are waaaaaay more capable of emergent understanding than people seem to be willing to admit.
https://www.deepmind.com/publications/a-generalist-agent
https://www.deepmind.com/blog/building-interactive-agents-in...
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw this example on Twitter today which shows ChatGPT doesn't understand: Mike's mother had 4 kids; 3 of them are named Luis, Drake and Matilda. What is the name of the 4th kid? I'm sorry, but I don't have information about the fourth kid. The information you provided is that Mike's mother has 4 kids, and three of them are named Luis, Drake, and Matilda. However, the name of the fourth child is not specified in the…
I had to read that 3-4 times before I understood that it was a riddle. So I put it in GPT3–and it got the answer right away: “Mike's mother had 4 kids; 3 of them are named Luis, Drake and Matilda. What is the name of the 4th kid? The fourth kid is Mike. ” So, maybe they just needed to try again.
I've tried a bunch of riddles, and it often cops out and refuses to try, but you can nudge it by telling it is a riddle and trying to nudge it. Sometimes you need to lead it a bit the way you might with a human who can't find a strategy to work their way through.
This doesn't seem too different from dealing with people to me.
It might not be all that smart, but if you try leading it through riddles step by step it's if anything harder to dismiss its ability to reason and understand - spitting out an answer wholesale might just demonstrate recall. Being able to talk through the steps, and getting it when you suggest it answer a sub-problem first, is of anything more impressive to me.
Re: ChatGPT Hype Is Proof Nobody Understands AI
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had to read that 3-4 times before I understood that it was a riddle. So I put it in GPT3–and it got the answer right away: “Mike's mother had 4 kids; 3 of them are named Luis, Drake and Matilda. What is the name of the 4th kid? The fourth kid is Mike. ” So, maybe they just needed to try again.
It's not a riddle because the answer is plain to anyone who understands English. I'm not saying you don't but the answer is right there. I asked it a followup: The name of the 4th child is in the question Ah, I see! My apologies for missing that. In that case, the name of the fourth child is Mike.
I had to read it multiple times before I understood why it was a test of understanding. It is a riddle.