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

2023: The Year of AI

journal.everypixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 84 posts

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#71

Post by cma »

squigz wrote: post #67
bamboozled wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we use it to solve real problems, make some real progress on climate change, then it will be something else from hype and it will be the year of AI. When you as an individual use it to sort PDFs or something it’s really hype.

AI isn't going to magically solve the issue of climate change. That's going to require global coordinated effort. In fact, I would say thinking that AI is going to solve 'real' issues like that, is more 'hype' than the above commenter.

Could make breakthroughs on fusion, through materials research or something else, and it has shown some results on fusion confinement control systems:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04301-9

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#72

Post by Kiro »

simbolit wrote: post #63
YetAnotherNick wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep hearing this, but which company has this policy? The privacy policy of openAI's enterprise(or Azure's) is not a lot different than say AWS, which everyone uses.

"everyone"? What are you talking about? Have you ever worked in any sector that has security policies? Even if you haven't, perhaps spend 2 minutes using a search engine? Here is a first page result for you: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/samsung-fab-workers-leak-c...

> Even if you haven't, perhaps spend 2 minutes using a search engine?

Obnoxious comment considering your link shows the opposite of what you're claiming.

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#73

Post by dartos »

cma wrote: post #70
dartos wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s because weights are where the magic lies, for the most part. Annnd nowadays tools like transformers can automatically select the architecture based on the name of the weights, so when interacting with LLMs, you generally just name the weights. Also MANY models are just using the llama or llama2 architecture.

Transformers self select the architecture based on the name of the weights? What does this mean?

Sorry, I meant huggingface transformers (the python package)

The name is a little confusing, since the package supports non transformers models as well (like RWKV)

I think HN took out the huggingface emoji from my post

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#74

Post by apwell23 »

dmezzetti wrote: post #22
apwell23 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> delivered multiple projects Very curious about the type of projects you've delivered.

You can look at https://github.com/neuml/txtai . Biggest thing of 2023 was RAG with models like Mistral.

Got it. Thank you. I thought you had delivered consumer facing applications when i read that comment.

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#75

Post by dmezzetti »

apwell23 wrote: post #74
dmezzetti wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can look at https://github.com/neuml/txtai . Biggest thing of 2023 was RAG with models like Mistral.

Got it. Thank you. I thought you had delivered consumer facing applications when i read that comment.

I've delivered consulting projects using RAG and Mistral 7B. Not saying it's easy to get the prompts right but I've been able to build systems that work well. Just trying to counter the myth that paid APIs are the only way to do this.

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#76

Post by simbolit »

austhrow743 wrote: post #64
simbolit wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"everyone"? What are you talking about? Have you ever worked in any sector that has security policies? Even if you haven't, perhaps spend 2 minutes using a search engine? Here is a first page result for you: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/samsung-fab-workers-leak-c...

Military, banking, health care all store their data on third party servers. It's the standard thing basically everywhere to do so. Your own link shows Samsung using ChatGPT. Not sure what point you're trying to make with it.

Yes, they used it. Did you read any further?

"These actions clearly put confidential information at risk, prompting Samsung to warn its employees about the dangers of using ChatGPT. Samsung Electronics informed its executives and employees that data entered into ChatGPT is transmitted and stored on external servers, making it impossible for the company to retrieve it and increasing risks of confidential information leakage."

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#77

Post by simbolit »

Kiro wrote: post #72
simbolit wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"everyone"? What are you talking about? Have you ever worked in any sector that has security policies? Even if you haven't, perhaps spend 2 minutes using a search engine? Here is a first page result for you: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/samsung-fab-workers-leak-c...

> Even if you haven't, perhaps spend 2 minutes using a search engine? Obnoxious comment considering your link shows the opposite of what you're claiming.

Obnoxious? Yes.

Opposite of what I claim? No.

"Samsung Electronics informed its executives and employees that data entered into ChatGPT is transmitted and stored on external servers, making it impossible for the company to retrieve it and increasing risks of confidential information leakage."

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#78

Post by Nevermark »

dartos wrote: post #66
kleiba wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s because weights are where the magic lies, for the most part. What's that supposed to mean? Weights are not independent of the underlying architecture.

They’re not, but the difference between the architecture outputting random garbage and impressive text is all in the weights.

And a fitting architecture can save orders of magnitude in numbers of weight and training time.

There isn’t one that’s more important than the other. There are no weights at all without an architecture. And any architecture improvements that pay off have a multiplier effect on efficiency.

Nobody on Earth had the resources to get the performance they are getting on these big models with just a default fully connected layer architecture.

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#79

Post by Nevermark »

bamboozled wrote: post #48
chime wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things are already changing for early adopters. Yesterday, I used a PDF GPT to review an 80+ page contract and GPT4 to explain specific parts of it in depth using layman's terms. I could have hired a lawyer like I have done in the past but that itself is a slow, laborious process and I often feel like my questions don't get thoroughly answered. I feel very confident of my understanding of the contract now. I also use…

When we use it to solve real problems, make some real progress on climate change, then it will be something else from hype and it will be the year of AI. When you as an individual use it to sort PDFs or something it’s really hype.

> When you as an individual use it to sort PDFs or something it’s really hype.

Personally speaking, anything that eliminates and reduces mundane but complex work is high magic. The real deal.

If “hype” pays for itself, it isn’t hype. It just became a necessity.

Re: 2023: The Year of AI

#80

Post by Nevermark »

dorkwood wrote: post #65
api wrote: post #13

AI has been gradually improving for decades, but this is the year we finally noticed. The big thing was huge progress in natural language understanding. 2023 was the year the Turing test was smashed. Seeing computers win games, drive cars, optimize systems, even design things wasn’t as subjectively impressive to most of us as being able to talk to them. This was the year we first saw AI that could sort of communicate…

I don't think the Turing test has successfully been passed, has it? I believe even Ray Kurzweil still predicts 2029, despite this year's advancements.

Anyone testing GPT4, without having heard of it or other recent progress, would be flabbergasted to find out it wasn’t human.

One problem with the Turing Test we might have predicted: if people have context on how models have improved, they narrow their expectations to match.

But I suppose the Strong Turing Test is when a model is so much smarter than us, that it can convincingly hide its differences and superiority, even when we have good reason to suspect it’s an AI.

Post reply on HN