<eyeroll> Nobody is saying there haven't been major changes in AI in the last few years. I certainly am not saying that.

But many of the underlying algorithms were well understood in different disciplines and the industry knew they would have application for AI, but the data and infrastructure just weren't there in the 60s or 1980s.

But yes false? Your argument is like saying people in 1850 knew about aerodynamics and combustion engines.

Which, yes, some did. Doesn't negate the first powered flight 50 years later, it was still a significant accomplishment.

Coming soon: undefined

Gradient Descent was well understood in the early 20th century for fluid dynamics I believe.

So, not false. :)

If you follow the bread crumbs back, you will find artificial neural networks decades ago, but computers were slow and had megabytes of memory. Data points in the past offer no guarantee for the future. Even if you can stack neural layers as though they were dirty dishes, you are just doing statistics. Which is fine but there are many different methods to reason that would work better.

I feel kinda bad for you f&cking with Bing like that.

[deleted]

Let me used it first then instead of some benchmark test

Who is this

I, for one, welcome our AI overlords....

Can you go into more detail?

In this case, there is more than 1 input that causes acceleration.

Set 1:

(1) more compute
(2) more investor money
(3) more people working on it

Set 2:

(A) existing AI making better designs of compute

(B) existing AI making money directly (see chatGPT premium)

(C) existing AI substituting for people by being usable to write code and research AI

&#x200B;

Set 1 existed in the 2010-2020 era. AI wasn't good enough to really contribute to set 2, and is only now becoming good enough.

So you have 2 separate sets of effects leading to an exponential amount of progress. How do you represent this mathematically? This looks like you need several functions.

This is false. None of the algorithms we use now existed. They were not understood. Prior versions of the algorithms that were much simpler did exist. It is chicken egg - we needed immense amounts of compute to find the algorithms needed to take advantage of immense amounts of compute.

2017...

Everything that mattered was the last few years. The previous stuff didn't work well enough.

Why are there studies on GPT-3.5 in 2020 if it appeared in 2022?

I think the simplest explanation is just caching, not a formula

Both the formulation and the response for this test is amazing. I'm going to be using it now to test other language models

If complexity is an S-curve it'll start tapering off around 14 billion years from now.

I've trained CNNs of up to 200m parameters on my laptops 3070 without any issues. I think it's only around 5gb of available VRAM.

This is a big concern of mine; AGI actually requires an insurmountable amount of VRAM to train in realistic timeframes thereby being essentially impossible. I mean, we could calculate all of these models by hand to train and then use to make predictions but it would take forever, like literally forever!

You are a concerned citizen just asking questions.

That's what they get for productizing something we barely understand how it works.

Yes, we 'understand' how it works in a basic sense, but not how it self organized according to its input and how it comes to the inferences it does.

Most of the time is innocuous and even helpful, but other times it's delusional or flat out crazy.

Seems here it's crazy by the language used by the user before, which sounds like a classic romantic novel argument and the AI is autocompleting.

I predict a lot more such interactions will emerge soon, because of this example and because people are emotional.

Does this “pop out” of a large language model as a consequence of speculation about the state of mind of third parties being included in the training data?

As if it wasn't happening without the AI.

The governments are gradually removing freedoms of the citizens wielding far more power than the societies can control. More and more countries around the world are falling into authoritarian and totalitarian regimes where human rights don't exist. Fake news are spreading so much they are vastly outnumbering the real facts. Most people don't care about anything other than their own comfort and running away from any responsibility, allowing people destroying freedom to do whatever they want.

If anything, AI is our chance to avoid extinction or dystopian world of slavery.

It poses a great existential danger, sure. But things are so dire right now that even with its great danger in mind it's still our best chance.

Yes. I don't believe AI exhibits this either.

Hey! That's a premium feature! You can't do that for free!

Sorry, but I cannot keep all the dozens of AI projects in my head.