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

OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#871

Post by BenoitP »

ethanbond wrote: post #868
BenoitP wrote: post #861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, especially given the timing. The drama must have quite disturbed the momentum they had, and this piece of prototype-teasing has all to reassure their market. It projects new advancements of untold impact, stoking the greed. And of course it is not verifiable. The show must go on.

The teasing started before the drama

Even better. Now is the perfect time to ramp up the PR.

Some very trivial Google searches will tell you their result is not out of the ordinary.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#872

Post by ethanbond »

BenoitP wrote: post #871
ethanbond wrote: post #868

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The teasing started before the drama

Even better. Now is the perfect time to ramp up the PR. Some very trivial Google searches will tell you their result is not out of the ordinary.

What results?

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#873

Post by luke-stanley »

CGamesPlay wrote: post #783

While we're all wildly speculating about what Q* is and if GPT-5 will be able to do grade-school maths, I stumbled upon this interesting paper that discusses mixing classic RL algorithms (MCTS, like from AlphaGo), with LLMs. Q* is typically used to refer to the search for the optimal policy in these algorithms. Paper: "Everything of Thoughts: Defying the Law of Penrose Triangle for Thought Generation " - https://arxi…

Great observation on the meaning of Q*. Maybe they had a breakthrough based on similar technology? I thought of 'Everything of Thoughts' - XoT too but I presumed it's a bit more than XoT since that's public knowledge research by Microsoft Research? I saw a good thread on XoT here: https://twitter.com/IntuitMachine/status/1724455405806346374 There is still a big difference between human neurons and what Transformers do I believe. Humans can be more shallow and deep at the same time in such an emotional, goal directed way. The rich emotional feedback loops we have are quite different but maybe XoT could contribute to a major breakthrough in achieving AGI, with a more straightforward approach that sidesteps complex emotions. I'm sure there are quite a few ways to go about it. Just some intuitions.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#874

Post by Garvi »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #865
white_dragon88 wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your son is a goddamn genius.

I'm going to be this guy, but isn't it just Pythagoras theorem with a slight twist which is taught at 11 - 14 year old levels? It only sounds complicated because of the words used like "complex", "imaginary", "real". So if you studied Pythagoras at school and someone (a YouTube video) says you just have to do Pythagoras on the i multiplier and the other number, it would be fairly easy if you understand Pythagoras?

I remember some time ago watching an episode of the Joe Rogan show(it had some comedic value back then) He and his friends were talking about the MIT admittance exam, pointing out the square root in the maths problem as an indication that this math problem was really hard. And I thought to myself "that's what primary school children learn around here at age 12 in my literally 3rd world country".

Pythagoras was around the same time. I'd like to warn people that not understanding these basic math concepts makes you appear uneducated to many people internationally.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#875

Post by naasking »

somenameforme wrote: post #590
naasking wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it were true that human persuasion is of limited use in shifting opinions, the parent posted is talking about superhuman persuasion. I don't think we should just assume those are equally effective.

Do you think any rhetoric could ever persuade you to you adopt the opposite general worldview of what you currently have? I'm positive that it could not for me. The reason for this is not because I'm obstinate, but because my worldview is not formed on persuasion, but on lived experience. And I think this is true for the overwhelming majority of people. It's why our views tend to change as we age, and experience more…

> Do you think any rhetoric could ever persuade you to you adopt the opposite general worldview of what you currently have?

Yes, it's possible.

> The reason for this is not because I'm obstinate, but because my worldview is not formed on persuasion, but on lived experience.

Lived experience is interpreted through framing. Rhetoric can change the framing through which we interpret the world through practice. This is why CBT works. Superhuman CBT could arguably work even better.

Remember that if "superhuman X" is possible, then our intuitions formed from "human X" are not necessarily valid. For sure any X still has a limit, but our intuitions about where that limit is may not be correct.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#876

Post by mewpmewp2 »

Garvi wrote: post #874
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #865

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to be this guy, but isn't it just Pythagoras theorem with a slight twist which is taught at 11 - 14 year old levels? It only sounds complicated because of the words used like "complex", "imaginary", "real". So if you studied Pythagoras at school and someone (a YouTube video) says you just have to do Pythagoras on the i multiplier and the other number, it would be fairly easy if you understand Pythagoras?

I remember some time ago watching an episode of the Joe Rogan show(it had some comedic value back then) He and his friends were talking about the MIT admittance exam, pointing out the square root in the maths problem as an indication that this math problem was really hard. And I thought to myself "that's what primary school children learn around here at age 12 in my literally 3rd world country". Pythagoras was around…

I put "absolute value of complex numbers" in YouTube, and the first video within 30 seconds says it's root of a squared + b squared. So all the kid has to know is to multiply a with itself, and b with itself and add them together.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#877

Post by mewpmewp2 »

naasking wrote: post #552
cduzz wrote: post #316

I was talking to my (12 year old) son about parts of math he finds boring. He said that he thinks absolute value is absurdly easy and extremely boring. I asked him if there was anything that might make it more interesting, he said "maybe complex numbers". So I asked him "what would the absolute value of i+1 be?" he thinks for a little bit and says "square root of 2" and I ask him "what about the absolute value of 2i…

> this sort of understanding is a result of some manner of understanding the underlying mechanisms and not a result of just having a huge dictionary of synonyms. He developed an understanding of the underlying mechanisms because he correlated concepts between algebraic and geometric domains, ie. multimodal training data. Multimodal models are already known to be meaningfully better than unimodal ones. We've barely sc…

First YouTube video that hit for "absolute value of complex" numbers says within 30 seconds that you have to take the 2 numbers, square them and add them and the result is square root of that. I doubt he had to come up with that on his own.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#878

Post by GTP »

panarky wrote: post #647
nostrademons wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I wonder, as a computer scientist: If you want to solve grade school math problems, why not use an 'add' instruction? It's been around since the 50s, runs a billion times faster than an LLM, every assembly-language programmer knows how to use it, every high-level language has a one-token equivalent, and doesn't hallucinate answers (other than integer overflow). We also know how to solve complex reasoning chains…

>> the ability to solve grade school maths problems would not be at all a predictor of ability to solve real mathematical problems at a research level > If you want to solve grade school math problems, why not use an 'add' instruction? Certainly the objective is not for the AI to do research-level mathematics. It's not really even to do grade-school math. The point is that grade-school math requires reasoning capabil…

> Certainly the objective is not for the AI to do research-level mathematics.

The problem is that there are different groups of people with different ideas about AI, and when talking about AI it's easy to end up tackling the ideas of a specific group but forgetting about the existence of the others. In this specific example, surely there are AI enthusiasts who see no limits to the applications of AI, including research-level mathematics.

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#879

Post by bigbacaloa »

Closi wrote: post #645
nostrademons wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I wonder, as a computer scientist: If you want to solve grade school math problems, why not use an 'add' instruction? It's been around since the 50s, runs a billion times faster than an LLM, every assembly-language programmer knows how to use it, every high-level language has a one-token equivalent, and doesn't hallucinate answers (other than integer overflow). We also know how to solve complex reasoning chains…

Why would we teach kids maths then, when they can use a calculator? It's much easier and faster for them. I believe it's because having a foundational understanding of maths and logic is important when solving other problems, and if you are looking to create an AI that can generally solve all problems it should probably have some intuitive understanding of maths too. i.e. if we want an LLM to be able to solve unsolve…

[dead]

Re: OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster

#880

Post by bigbacaloa »

singularity2001 wrote: post #686
curling_grad wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, OpenAI did a research[0] on solving some hard math problems by integrating language model and Lean theorem prover some time ago. [0]: https://openai.com/research/formal-math

how do they achieve 41.2% in high school Olympiads but only 55% for grade school problems? PS: also I thought GPT4 already achieved 90% in some university math grades? Oh I remember that was multiple-choice

[dead]
Post reply on HN