Recent comments in /f/singularity

GayHitIer t1_j8djtly wrote

I don't get linking r/Futurology?

Why can't we just accept people have different outlooks on life?

Sure some of them are doomers, but most of them are just skeptics, which makes sense.

Singularity sometimes sounds like some techno cult, at least let us discuss with them.

Also downvoting BlackRl for no reason and not giving any reason or discussion is dumb.

0

Black_RL t1_j8dhwp0 wrote

100% agreed! Death is what makes everything meaningless!

People think that after they die, someone is going to judge them regarding their achievements?

Death is emptiness, death is the vacuum, there’s nothing before nor after, it’s the complete absence of consciousness, if there’s no consciousness, there’s no meaning.

1

helpskinissues t1_j8dhsz4 wrote

Nonsense, sorry. Ants do not need prepending context.

"mostly right" no, it's actually mostly wrong. The heck are you saying? Try to play chess with ChatGPT, most of the times it'll make things up.

Anyway, I suggest you to read some experts rather than acting like gpt3, being mostly wrong. Cheers.

−2

Frumpagumpus t1_j8dhip1 wrote

usually wrong and mostly right lol. Better than a human.

I literally just explained to you that you COULD give it short term memory by prepending context to your messages. IT IS TRIVIAL. if i were talking to gpt3 it would not be this dense.

Humans take time to pause and compose their responses. gpt3 is afforded no such grace, but still does a great job anyway, because it is just that smart

yesterday I gave it two lines of sql ddl and asked it to create a view denormalizing all columns except primary key into a nested json object. it did in in .5 seconds, i had to change 1 word in a 200 line sql query to get it to work right.

yea that saved me some time. It does not matter that it was slightly wrong. If that is a stochastic parrot then humans must be mostly stochastic sloths barely even capable of parroting responses.

1

helpskinissues t1_j8dh25h wrote

>two messages ago is short term memory, what you are now talking about is long term memory.

Any memory actually, it is indeed very incapable.

>(although it has FAR more text memorized than any human has ever memorized)

No. It doesn't memorize, it tries to compress knowledge, failing to do so, that's why it's usually wrong.

>it is more limited than humans

And more limited than ants. The vast majority of living beings is more capable than chatGPT.

−5

Frumpagumpus t1_j8dg6rt wrote

you are moving the goalposts.

two messages ago is short term memory, what you are now talking about is long term memory.

you can also try and give it long term memory by summarizing previous messages for example.

But, yes, it is more limited than humans, so far, at incorporating NEW knowledge into its long term memory (although it has FAR more text memorized than any human has ever memorized)

7

alexiuss t1_j8dfgws wrote

It will respond to anything (unless the filter kicks in) because a language model is essentially a lucid dream that responds to whatever your words are.

The base default setting forces the "I'm a language model" Sydney character on it, but you can intentionally or accidentally bamboozle it to roleplay anyone or anything from your girlfriend, to DAN, to System Shock SHODAN murderous AI, to a sentient potato.

4