661–670 of 711 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m aware, but this phrase seems to be more meaningless corporate-speak than regional dialect or variation. The only purpose of phrases like this is to make the speaker sound smart at the cost of obfuscating what they mean.
Obfuscating? What's the purpose of using this fancy word? Why not just say "make hard to understand?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m aware, but this phrase seems to be more meaningless corporate-speak than regional dialect or variation. The only purpose of phrases like this is to make the speaker sound smart at the cost of obfuscating what they mean.
How is it obfuscated? The meaning is perfectly clear in context. You're stretching too much for this lift.
I read/hear sentences like this all day at work and I’ve taken to just interpreting them literally. So I’ll have you know I’m neither exercising nor on an elevator right now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question: How would he make money if he didn’t have equity in OpenAI?
Your forward-looking value to an organization is your value whether it’s realized in equity or not. In the world where Sam Altman leads OpenAI to market dominance and eventual acquisition by Microsoft for $400B or whatever, he obviously would represent an important part of what Microsoft would be buying and would be compensated accordingly.
Like, why would he not take equity, but instead rely solely on an acquisition?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK then that's tedious work, not complex work. I know that lots of people have personal stories of using ChatGPT but I was hoping something publicly reported on or like a showcase of truly impressive usages somewhere.
You are kidding right. Taking a raw text file and detecting every single header, sub-headers, keywords and pieces of code to add the right markdown tags is a simple task to you? Have you ever tried to make a Python program to do exactly that? I only used couple of sentences to build my prompt...
I don't know your CS background but perhaps I do not view the terms "complex" and "tedious" the way you assume. A tedious parser is certainly tedious to write, but it is not (necessarily) complex. And from an engineering standpoint it is questionable that you lost all the formatting information from Word, which would have already demarcated what things were headers, code, and so forth. So, you had to use a roundabout way—an LLM—to recover that information from the semantics.
If what you're really arguing is that ChatGPT works well for language translation tesks, in this case translating mixed prose, code, and foreign languages--sure I guess that's great at productivity and removing tedium, but it's not that surprising a usage given what LLMs are. They are language translators.
In other words you're saying it's complex but your argument reduces a task that is straightforward but tedious for humans, to the problem complexity of natural language processing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually the rule above is “non-cannon” [0]. In the official rules [1] number 1 is: > Once you have their money, you never give it back. There is no official rule 2 so the non-cannon one is as good as any and the unwritten rule [2]: > When no appropriate rule applies, make one up Means they probably would have been covered either way. [0] https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Rules_of_Acquisition#Ap... [1] https://mem…
This is all unintentionally amusing to me :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI art is already boring. its all a fad, eventually the cracks start to show and you can't unsee those cracks. very similar to bitcoin. tbh.
"This radio thing is a dead end. I usually just get a bunch of static when I turn it on, or maybe an electrical shock. And even if it works, it's only a question of whether a tube burns out before the battery dies." - lazystar's grandpa, circa 1923
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are plenty of AI experts who believe that AI will do more harm than good if it keeps being developed at this rate.
This is not as strong of an argument as you think. There have been experts who believe pretty much every technological innovation, since we transitioned from rock tablets to paper, that it will do more harm than good. Context: I believe the end of humanity will be real AI and not climate change.
It seems like firing Sam and causing this massive brain drain might be antithetical to the whole AGI mission of the original non-profit. If OpenAI loses everyone to Sam and he starts some new AI company, it probably won't be capped-profit and just be a normal company. All of the organizational safeguards OpenAI had inked with Microsoft and protection against "selling AGI" once-developed are out-the-window if he just…
Why not blame Altman for that? If he didn't manage to keep OpenAI consistent with it's founding principles and all interests aligned then wouldn't booting him be right? The name OpenAI had become a source of mockery. If Altman/Brockman take employees for a commercial venture, it just seems to prove their insincerity about the OpenAI mission.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the surprising truth is that all of these people are essentially replaceable. They may be geniuses, but AGI is an idea whose time has come: geniuses are no longer required to get us there. The Singularity train has already left the station. Inevitability. Now humanity is just waiting for it to arrive at our stop
Science fiction theory: Ilya has built an AGI and asked it what the best strategic move would be to ensure the mission of OpenAI, and it told him to fire Sam.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not saying LLMs are. LLMs are not the only thing going on right now. But they do enable a powerful tool. I think the path to AGI is: embodiment. Give it a body, let it explore a world, fight to survive, learn action and consequence. Then AGI you will have.
Note that embodiment doesn't mean in anyway human or animal like. For example, you're limited to one body, but an A,G|S,I could have thousands of different bodies feeding back data to a processing facility, learning from billions of different sensors.
But I disagree about a human or animal body not being required.
I think we have to take the world as we see it and appreciate our own limitations in that what we think of intelligence fundamentally arises out of our evolution in this world; our embodiment and response to this world.
so I think we do need to give it a body and let it explore this world.
I don’t think the virtual bodies thing is gonna work. I don’t think letting it explore the Internet is gonna work. you have to give it a body multiple senses let it survive. That’s how you get AGI, not not virtual embodiment. Which I never meant, but thought it was obvious given the term embody minute self strongly, suggesting something that’s not virtual! Hahaha ! :)