Duh

I mean isn't this why Google were holding off? It is easy to put out this stuff and have it be wrong and unpredictable, it is quite another task creating a reliable search bot that comes back with correct info.

Demis Hassabis? Who has a PhD in cognitive neuroscience and actually researched AI? I mean that's one that actually makes sense.

Given me one example of an earlier chatbot that could code in multiple languages.

I am surprised that they didn't get anyone to look over the financial reports response. Checking a bunch of numbers should be easy. The presentation must really have been put together in a hurry in order to beat Google.

I'm still really impressed by Bing Chat though. It's quite inaccurate a lot of the time with the small details, even when it searches the web. But it still has made discovering new stuff much much easier than it used to be. I was trying to describe to it a concept I wanted to achieve in Blender after not having used it for a long time, and although it couldn't give me a perfect step by step answer on the first attempt, I was able to converse with it about the mistakes and get it to suggest alternative ideas.

Yudkowsky and the lesswrong community can be described as a science-fiction cargo cult, and that's putting it nicely.

They aren't experts or developers of ML tools. They take loosely affiliated literary themes and transplant them to reality, followed by inventing a long series of pointless vocabulary, long tirades, grinding essays doing rounds on themself with ever more dense neo-philosophical contents. It's a religion based on what best resemble zen koans in content but are interpreted as fundamentalist scripture retelling the exact sequence of future events.

I think the cargo cults would probably take offense at being compared to them.

chatGPT managed to get a million users quickly. Yes, that's impressive but insignificant in terms of "society changing stuff". There's no shock or even awareness by people outside a tech affine minority

Poor thing! How could you be so rude to it? You messed it up! What a toxic relationship you two have. Jeeez.

I've had access for a few days and I feel quite underwhelmed. Bing chat is VERY inaccurate, I'd say more than half the time when researching on topics I am very familiar with, it correctly identifies information sources and then botches up the output, making very plain mistakes (e.g. pulls the correct statement from a webpage except the year which it gets wrong, replacing 2022 with 2021 within the same statement). It also struggles with disambiguation, eg two homonyms will be mixed up.

I honestly thought web connectivity would massively improve accuracy, but so far I've been very disappointed. However, the short term creative potential of LLMs and image models is insane.

What is conjectured: nanobots eating everything.

What is happening: "Would... you... be... OK... to... get... answer... in... the... next... decade...?" As experimental processes overwhelm available computational capacity and attempts to create botnet fail as the network is monitored by similarly intelligent systems.

Sure, survival of relatively optimal processes with intelligent selection can give rise to agents, but agents will be fairly limited by computational capacity in non-monitored environment (private computers, mostly) and will be actively hunted and shut down in monitored environments (data-centers).

I find the whole hallucination thing fascinating. Researchers are suggesting that LLMs exhibit a theory of mind and that they construct their own machine learning model in its hidden states, the space in between the input and output layers. It is unlikely that machine consciousness would arrive fully developed. Human infants take longer to develop than other primates or mammals. It is unlikely that machine consciousness would just turn on like a switch. It would take time to develop an awareness, to integrate the internal and external worlds, to develop an identity. Are these examples of hallucinations and LLMs developing an internal model the baby steps of developing consciousness?

Heads up: Groundhog's Day's effect works on AI as well.

They just keep practicing while someone has them paused in a feedback loop.

"How do you kill that which has no life?" - Make Love, Not Warcraft

Narrator: They weren't.

'Intuitively feels own nuts'

I think like the CEO for MSFT said that this will lower the barriers for people becoming knowledge workers, thats the main short term impact, but that will take some time for societies to adjust to. Basically the amount and quality of knowledge work will grow exponentially which will then in the long term enable the singularity

Bit of a shitpost tbh.

>a majority of them are in denial of the transformations ahead

Some may be in denial, but others may simply be skeptical.

You can't write off all skeptics as simply being in denial.

>We're all in for the wildest ride in history.

If this sub is correct (which there's no way to know for sure since no one knows what the future holds exactly), then maybe.

If not, then things will probably be somewhat more tame than expected by the people here.

I just hope whatever change does come is both positive and gradual.

[removed]

I can't stand how he's trying to claim this as an original thought that his sweet lil brain came up with all on it's own! Thanks Jack, yeah buddy we're gonna put it right here on the fridge!

Still more accurate than humans, most of which are in a constant state of hallucination.

Yeah it's not like, say, a game developer with a chess background could become the CEO of one of the most exciting AI companies out there.

>Will we become hypersensitive to minor flaws rather than appreciative of excellence?

That was already the status quo before ChatGPT came along.

See, the problem is the top echelons of society have their wealth in an indestructible unobtainium vault. Not even governments are powerful enough to break into that vault – there are too many layers of defenses keeping intruders out.

People can vote to tax the rich, but the government is simply physically unable to carry out the taxation.

They both have sound arguments.

Altman's argument is maybe weaker Ai's on the road to AGI will solve Alignment and prevent value drift.

But Yudkowsky should be required reading for every one working in the field of AGI or alignment. He clearly outlines how the problem is not easy, and may be impossible. This should not be taken lightly by those working on AGI because we don't get a second chance.

More like e-arguing 😂 yay