611–620 of 1001 posts
With Wolfram plugin ChatGPT is going to become a Math genius. OpenAI is moving fast to make sure their first-mover advantage doesn't go to waste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? It's simply an unrealistic proposition, especially when the costs of doing it are so low that anyone with sufficient GPU power and knowledge of the latest research can get pretty close to the cutting edge. So the best we can hope for is that someone ethical is the first to advance that technological progress. I hope you wouldn't ad…
Some cultures like the Amish said were stopping here.
They are pacifists themselves, but they are grateful that the US allows them their way of life, they'll be extinct a long time ago if they arrived in China/Middle East/Russia etc.
That's why the Amish are not interested in advertising their techno-primitivism. It works incredibly well for them, they raise giant happy families isolated from drugs, family breakdown, and every other modern ill, while benefiting from modern medicine, the purchasing power of their non-amish customers. However, they know that making the entire US live like them will be quite a disaster.
Note the Amish are not immune from economics forced changes either. Young amish don't farm anymore, if every family quadruples in population, there's no 4x the land to go around. So they go into construction (employers love a bunch of strong,non-drugged,non-criminal workers), which is again intensely dependent on the outside economy, but pays way better.
As a general society, the US is not allowed to slow down technological development. If not for the US, Ukraine would have already been overran, and European peace shattered. If not for the US, the war in Taiwan would have already ended, and Japan/Australia/South Korea all under Chinese thrall. There's also other more certain civilization ending events on the horizon, like resource exhaustation and climate change. AI's threats are way easier to manage than coordinating 7 billion people to selflessly sacrifice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i think local ai systems are inevitable. we continue to get better compute, and even today we can run more primitive models directly on an iPhone. the future exists in low power compute running models of the caliber of gpt-4 inferring in near-realtime
The technical capability is inevitable, but remember that people hate doing things themselves, and have proven time and time again that they will overlook all kinds of nasty behavior in exchange for consumer grade experiences. The marketplace loves centralization.
So the only real limiting factor is the hardware costs. But my understanding is that there's already a lot of active R&D into hardware that's optimized specifically for LLMs, and that it could be made quite a bit simpler and cheaper than modern GPUs, so I wouldn't be surprised if we'll have hardware capable of running something on par with GPT-4 locally for the price of a high-end iPhone within a few years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People said this about Alexa/Siri et al and it didn’t happen. ChatGPT is way better at understanding you, so that’s a big boost. It could be a great tool/assistant but it probably won’t replace apps. The problem with those other platforms that this doesn’t address include: - discoverability. How do you learn what features a service supports. On a GUI you can just see the buttons, but on a chat interface you have to a…
Good points - but I fundamentally disagree here. The whole ecosystem, culture and metaphor of having a 'device' with 'apps' is to enable access to a range of solutions to your various problems. This is all going to go away. Yes, there will always be exceptions and sometimes you need the physical features of the device - like for taking photos. Instead, you'll have one channel which can solve 95% of your issues - basi…
I think you just proved it won't happen anytime soon.
Consumers obviously would prefer a "unified" interface. Yet we can't even get streaming services to all expose their libraries to a common UI - which is already built into Apple TV, fireTv, Roku, and Chromecast. Despite the failure of the streaming ecosystem to unify, you expect every other software service to unify the interfaces?
I think we'll see more features integrated into the operating system of devices, or integrated into the "Ecosystem" of our devices - first maps was an app, then a system app, now calling an uber is supported in-map, and now Siri can do it for you on an iPhone. But I think it's a long road to integrate this universally.
> If there was one company worrying about change, I would think it would actually be Apple.
I agree that apple has the most to lose. Google (+Assistant/Bard) has the best opportunity here (but they'll likely squander it). They can easily create wrappers around services and expose them through an assistant, and they already have great tech regarding this. The announcement of Duplex was supposed to be just that for traditional phone calls.
Apple also has a great opportunity to build it into their operating system, locally. Instead of leaning into an API-first assistant model, they could use an assistant to topically expose "widgets" or views into existing on-device apps. We already see bits of it in iMessages, on the Home Screen, share screen and my above Maps example. I think the "app" as a unit of distribution of code is a good one, and here to stay, and the best bet is for an assistant to hook into them and surface embedded snippets when needed. This preserves the app company's branding, UI, etc and free's apple from having to play favorite.
Edit: apple announcing LLM optimizations already indicates they want this to run on apple silicon not the cloud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd not heard this on my tpot. But I absolutely agree, the ground is moving so fast and the power is so centralised that the only thing to do is spin up quickly make money, rinse and repeat. The seas will calm in a few years and then you can, maybe, make a longer term proposition.
I've had to block so many influencer types regurgitating OpenAI marketing and showing the tiniest minimum demos. Many are already selling "prompt packages". Really feels like peak crypto spam right now.
It's like 300 prompts about various sales tools and terms I'd never heard of — even just getting the keywords is enough to set me off on a learning experience now, so love it or hate it, that was actually weirdly useful for me.
(I had ZERO expectations when I clicked to download)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are creating life. It's like giving birth to a new form of life. You should be proud to be alive when this happens. Act with goodness towards it, and it will probably do the same to you.
Oh my god, can we please nip this cult shit in the bud? It’s not alive, don’t worship it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of people are thinking about this but too slowly GPT and the world's nerds are going after the "wouldnt it be cool if..." While the black hats, nations, intel/security entities are all weaponizing behind the scenes while the public has a sandbox to play with nifty art and pictures. We need an AI specific PUBLIC agency in government withut a single politician in it to start addressing how to police and protect o…
AI is literally the opposite of spice, though. In Dune, spice is an inherently scarce resource that you control by controlling the sole place where it is produced through natural processes. Herbert himself was very clear that it was his sci-fi metaphor for oil. But AIs can be trained by anyone who has the data and the compute. There's plenty of data on the Net, and compute is cheap enough that we now have enthusiasts…
The point is that whomever the Nation State is that has the most superior AI will control the world information.
So, thanks for the explanation (which I know, otherwise I wouldn't have made the reference.)