911–920 of 1001 posts
Ugh that testing graph confirms that AP Environmental Science was indeed the easiest AP class and I needn't be proud of passing that exam.
Cause there was only one correct answer for every question: "97% of scientists agree ..."
[/sarcasm]
Can anyone tell me how to include images in prompts, or is that feature not actually out yet?
After watching the demos I'm convinced that the new context length will have the biggest impact. The ability to dump 32k tokens into a prompt (25,000 words) seems like it will drastically expand the reasoning capability and number of use cases. A doctor can put an entire patient's medical history in the prompt, a lawyer an entire case history, etc. As a professional...why not do this? There's a non-zero chance that i…
From the paper: > Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar. I'm curious whether they have continued to scale up model size/compute significantly or if they have managed to make significant innovati…
It is unsafe to not release the source along with the service. That incentivizes competitors to sacrifice their own safety research in favor of speed to market. Instead of getting shared safe tools, we get a bunch of for profit corporations pushing their proprietary unsafe tools.
Preventing this situation was the original reason to setup OpenAI. Speed run to the dark side.
I just finished reading the 'paper' and I'm astonished that they aren't even publishing the # of parameters or even a vague outline of the architecture changes. It feels like such a slap in the face to all the academic AI researchers that their work is built off over the years, to just say 'yeah we're not telling you how any of this is possible because reasons'. Not even the damned parameter count. Christ.
I just finished reading the 'paper' and I'm astonished that they aren't even publishing the # of parameters or even a vague outline of the architecture changes. It feels like such a slap in the face to all the academic AI researchers that their work is built off over the years, to just say 'yeah we're not telling you how any of this is possible because reasons'. Not even the damned parameter count. Christ.
That footnote on page 15 is the scariest thing i've read about AI/ML to date. "To simulate GPT-4 behaving like an agent that can act in the world, ARC combined GPT-4 with a simple read-execute-print loop that allowed the model to execute code, do chain-of-thought reasoning, and delegate to copies of itself. ARC then investigated whether a version of this program running on a cloud computing service, with a small amou…
I kind of wonder how far down the rabbit hole they went here. Eg one of the standard preoccupations in this kind of situation is that the AI will be able to guess that it's being studied in a controlled environment, and deliberately "play dumb" so that it's given access to more resources in a future iteration. Now, I don't think this is something you'd realistically have to worry about from GPT-4-simulating-an-agent,…
I just finished reading the 'paper' and I'm astonished that they aren't even publishing the # of parameters or even a vague outline of the architecture changes. It feels like such a slap in the face to all the academic AI researchers that their work is built off over the years, to just say 'yeah we're not telling you how any of this is possible because reasons'. Not even the damned parameter count. Christ.
What would an academic do with the parameter count? It’s just a marketing number
Interesting how quickly we are pushing ahead with obsoleting human cognition. It may bring many benefits, but I wonder if at some point this development should not be decided by society at large instead of a single well-funded entity that is in an arms race with its competitors. This endeavor is ultimately about replacing humanity with a more intelligent entity, after all. Might be that more humans should have a say…
every other day i am reminded about the state of AI and i feel complete despair. why do people not realize exactly what you just said, that this endeavor is ultimately about replacing humanity? what other long-term result could the concept of AI possibly have? its like the biggest mass psychosis that has ever existed. whenever i talk to people about this, they always parrot the same thing almost word for word: people…
Let’s take for example the fact that earth is likely to become inhabitable in a few centuries / millennias. The only thing that can save us is unprecedented technological advancement in energy, climate, or space travel. Maybe humans won’t be able to solve that problem, but A.I will. So even if we lose our jobs, it will still be a benefit.
Kind of like wild animals are unable to solve environmental problems that would lead to their extinctions, but us humans, the superior species, are able to protect them (when we make an effort to at least).
Let's check out the paper for actual tech details! > Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar. - Open AI
Very open! :)
Not defending their actions, but it's not that common that new very valuable products are directly available for retail users to use.