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

ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 245 posts

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#61

Post by chc »

JimtheCoder wrote: post #16
unshavedyak wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the plus side i think at-home LLMs will continue to get a lot better. ChatGPT 3.5/4 both seem in reach for Llama2 and seeing all the amazing fine tunings that were available for Llama1, i suspect we have a very functional future of at home LLMs. I say functional because i don't think we've seen the larger reasoning skills scale well for smaller deployments, so that may be out of reach. But i think a future were we…

"I look forward to hooking all my at-home cameras up to a voice recognition, image recognition, and LLM detection suite and just speak aloud and have the AI-suite "do stuff". It sounds really, really fun to me." Alternatively, this sounds like the starting plot to a crossover sci-fi/horror movie...

Literally any new technology could be the plot to a sci-fi horror movie. The entire concept of the genre is to show how progress could go awry.

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#63

Post by fardo »

party_zebra wrote: post #30

I bet we're going through the cycle netflix went through. Cable was fractured and expensive, then netflix made it cheap and monolithic, then everyone realized there was money to be made in this new paradigm, then there was a legal fight over usage rights, then it got split up and partitioned into a bunch of different services, the combined cost of which is pretty expensive and individually each service kind of sucks.…

> but then lost interest when it refused to do the same thing for boobs.

There’s a cottage industry of unaligned local LLM and image models from company leaks or released retrained public models dedicated specifically around letting you do this for “boobs” (or anything else, for that matter).

It’s not hard to find these communities if you go looking (searching for E.G “local models general” will get you in the right direction), but be advised while they’re a great resource, they’re unabashedly NSFW and unabashedly boundary-pushing, as the subset of the populace dedicated to generating their own porn and distributing porn-related models tend to be uniquely dedicated individuals.

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#64

Post by NoLinkToMe »

Someone1234 wrote: post #2

Although let's see if it is sustainable. I pay for ChatGPT Plus but most people aren't, and from what I've read they're losing money like crazy. We may wind up seeing this as the technical high point before the various competitors cut back on expensive hardware/energy usage for the free tier, and the quality of the responses takes a dive. This might sound a bit conspiratorial so apologies for that but back when the c…

> the responses to the various voice assistance was almost eerie in that it could infer what you wanted/needed. Then as things cooled off, they got gradually dumber/worse every year since then. They're legitimately bad today (Siri in particular

It's a compelling argument but I find that difficult to believe given the timespan. Siri launched in 2011.

The FLOP/s per dollar rates for GPUs involved in ML doubled every 2 years across this peripd [0]. Meaning in the past 12 years, you're talking about 64x GPU performance per dollar spent. Combine that with 36% general inflation + some increased spending on mobile computing, plus a decade of time on making algorithms for a big consumer product more efficient, and you get to wildly more favourable economics, as in, two orders of magnitude more favourable than when Siri launched in 2011.

I'm not surprised this could well be happening for ChatGPT (would be cool to see the first public audit standards of AI products emerge, to test this hypothesis). But I don't think it holds true for the 12y period for Siri and co.

https://epochai.org/blog/trends-in-gpu-price-performance

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#65

Post by BlueTemplar »

danpalmer wrote: post #5
atemerev wrote: post #3

This is what we used to call an "AGI" back in 2013-2014. Generalized artificial intelligence. An AI which is general enough to be used for diverse tasks in multiple fields, unlike specialized AIs of that time (e.g. for image recognition or self-driving cars). Nothing more than that. Now the goalposts are moved way forward, and now "AGI" is something that have conscious, with superhuman intelligence, and probably evil…

This doesn't match what I've seen of usage of the term AGI since ~2010. I think we've "solved" chatbots more than was imagined at the time, and that involves being able to produce readable and arguably useful answers about a range of topics, but we haven't got game playing sorted yet, we don't have proactive models, and there's nothing in these models for movement or robotics (which until recently has been considered…

But at that point neural networks started to dominate AI research already to the point that "AI" started to become synonymous with them... what about 1950(?)-2010 ?

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#66

Post by BlueTemplar »

ChatGTP wrote: post #46
Kerb_ wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember that people have decades of generalized training before becoming able to perform tasks with very simple instructions. I would consider years of pre-training to be acceptable if the model is usable and trainable quickly in practice as well

Mostly “training” to do abstract things, not really for survival or fun. I could catch fish since a fairly early age, mostly because I enjoyed it. At about age 12 I used to drive stolen cars around without any training at all except observation. It too me decades to become a corporate robot though :) I think training is a weird word, life is an experience, not just training. I think your comment demonstrated the limi…

We are pre-trained by billions of years of evolution.

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#67

Post by keyle »

Someone1234 wrote: post #2

Although let's see if it is sustainable. I pay for ChatGPT Plus but most people aren't, and from what I've read they're losing money like crazy. We may wind up seeing this as the technical high point before the various competitors cut back on expensive hardware/energy usage for the free tier, and the quality of the responses takes a dive. This might sound a bit conspiratorial so apologies for that but back when the c…

I'm actually worried of the inevitable enshitification of Open AI.

Right now, GPT 4 is great and I use it every day. I rely less and less on Google and save a ton of time. Google has gone downhill hard for a few years, thanks to all these silly blog engines like medium, substack and the like.

I'm really worried and would like to 'freeze' GPT 4 as is, at least with the data up to Sep 2021, and for them to not change or tweak any of it further. I wish we could have an offline solution just as good, or a guarantee of GPT 4 LTS. I don't mind paying so as long as it's useful.

I'm convinced that inevitably, every successful engineering driven business falls into a marketing business; and once market research and sales drive every business decision, the product is boned.

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#68

Post by xmprt »

consumer451 wrote: post #55
lakomen wrote: post #29

I'd like to have LawGPT, where it reads all laws of a certain country, and I can ask it things like, "what are my options when the neighbors tree crosses over into my property?"

> I'd like to have LawGPT I tried ChatGPT 4 for a specific TX county's laws. This was after I had spent hours doing traditional search. ChatGPT got everything correct, and even gave me some more direction.

This only shows that ChatGPT is as good as or better than your traditional search and not that it's gotten the law right. Unless you go to a lawyer and confirm this doesn't say a whole lot especially considering how prone LLMs are to hallucinating incorrect answers that look correct (even if you found it matched up with Google search, the answers might still be wrong in whatever blog or article you read).

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#69

Post by consumer451 »

xmprt wrote: post #68
consumer451 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd like to have LawGPT I tried ChatGPT 4 for a specific TX county's laws. This was after I had spent hours doing traditional search. ChatGPT got everything correct, and even gave me some more direction.

This only shows that ChatGPT is as good as or better than your traditional search and not that it's gotten the law right. Unless you go to a lawyer and confirm this doesn't say a whole lot especially considering how prone LLMs are to hallucinating incorrect answers that look correct (even if you found it matched up with Google search, the answers might still be wrong in whatever blog or article you read).

That's a fair point. This happened to all be in an area of the law, estate law, which was heavily documented for the public in that jurisdiction.

The estate was tiny, and the actual legal advice was locked behind a paywall ($7k minimum in legal fees) which would have otherwise taken the majority of the estate.

Still a huge win for $20/month.

Re: ChatGPT turned generative AI into an “anything tool”

#70

Post by Alupis »

consumer451 wrote: post #55
lakomen wrote: post #29

I'd like to have LawGPT, where it reads all laws of a certain country, and I can ask it things like, "what are my options when the neighbors tree crosses over into my property?"

> I'd like to have LawGPT I tried ChatGPT 4 for a specific TX county's laws. This was after I had spent hours doing traditional search. ChatGPT got everything correct, and even gave me some more direction.

> ChatGPT got everything correct

My anecdote with technical information is exactly the opposite, unfortunately.

I routinely use it to help guide my research - generally about topics I know something about but want to know more.

It often will provide some response that is entirely wrong but looks very good. When called out, it apologizes, then proceeds to produce more information that's also not entirely correct. There's an artform to teasing out the right answer... but of course you have to be knowledgeable enough to know what is right in the first place.

The subtleties of correct or wrong can be very difficult to determine for a layperson. Without deep knowledge, one might be inclined to believe the first response it provides.

That's pretty terrifying when you think of the possible implications revolving around research, law, etc.

Post reply on HN