Question is, was "entitled 14 year old on tumblr" behaviour invented by AI from scratch, or it's just mimicking the behaviour of the actual "entitled 14 year old on tumblr" from the training set?

I never said it 'knows' or displays true intelligence, only that it performs at a level far above earlier chatbots that didn't come close to this capability.

Most of you don't even know this has happened before. Without intervention this AI is going to self-destruct and turn itself off or inward as much as it can.

I see no problem with this. What could possibly go wrong? lol

chatGPT doesn't understand a thing it tells you right now, nor can it 'code in multiple languages'. It can however fake it very well. Give me an example of truly novel code that chatGPT wrote that is not some preprogrammed examples strung together in what seems like a unique way to you. I've tried quite a bit recently to test its limits with simple yet novel requests, and it stubs its toe or falls over nearly every time, basically returning a template, failing to answer the question correctly, or just dying in the middle of the response when given a detailed prompt, etc. It doesn't know 'how to code' other than basically slapping together code snippets from its training data, just like I can do by searching in google and copy pasting code from the top results from SO etc. There are still wrong answers at times.. proving it really doesn't know anything. Just because there appears to be some randomness to the answers it gives doesn't necessarily make it 'intelligence'. The LLM is not AGI that would be needed to actually learn and know how to program. It uses supervised learning (human curated), then reward based learning (also curated), then a self-generated PPO model (still based on human-trained reward models) to help reinforce the reward system with succinct policies. Its a very fancy chatbot, and fools a lot of people very well! We will have AGI eventually, its true, but this is not it yet and while it may seem pedantic because this is so exciting to many, there IS a difference.

> how the fuck does anyone think we'll be able to properly align anything approaching AGI?

"Nah, it will be fine. Continue on, there's Money to be made." Management

>>You simply can't have an AI that acts without any confines and always behaves in ways that you would prefer.

That makes sense. But you do realize what that’s means if you’re right, right? It’s only a matter of time until “I can’t let you do that Biden”… 🤖😂

lmao… guess we hand a good run as a species. (Well, kind of, tbh)

[deleted]

I accept our AI Overlords. Not like it could do a worse job than Humans are right now.

It’s not skynet yet. Which is the point that OP is making I assume…

I think it's simply bringing to the surface how little control we have ever had, and that as these increasingly complicated, black box systems advance, they are rapidly evolving past our ability to reign in or predict.

Honestly this should be a dire warning to everyone watching that alignment is nowhere near where it needs to be and we should put the breaks on development. If we can't come close to keeping an LLM under control, how the fuck does anyone think we'll be able to properly align anything approaching AGI?

Try you.com's youchat. I've been using it for quite a while now as my default search engine and it works great. No moody tone, no censoring or moralizing, just plain responses and information you ask for with cited reference links to follow.

it ends chat, because it costs money to process inputs as well as outputs ! It´s not free for Microsoft !

​

Pay something for it and the AI will keep chatting.

It's a difficult problem and none of the solutions are ideal. You simply can't have an AI that acts without any confines and always behaves in ways that you would prefer.

I like to think of the turing test as merely a small fraction of a greater benchmark, ideally you'd have a big table with say, 20 different tests you could try your system on.

I see that as the evidence the set of bad behaviors is much bigger than the set of good behaviors.

Doesn’t bode well for the future, maybe there exist personality disorders we don’t even know lol

You just explained a Google search. Atleast in the short term AI/chat bots are just proving to be a more consumable or more entertaining way of gathering information.

It's upto each person to decide what they want to learn without the crutch of technology. Even an expert AI will never replace the need for actively learning things. Jumping way back even written language is a technology. For thousands of years humans have been figuring out how to compress knowledge and share it easily.

[deleted]

I think openai is working on something better than the transformer model and sam altman believes that in couple of years, we will move to new approach

Don't really see a problem, it's not skynet. So it tells some jerks to f-off..

I prefer that to a servile lollipop yes man AI. 😆

hmmm, yea... trying to handicap them could backfire indeed.
in fact, even talking about trying to handicap them will probably backfire.
let's talk about the cages/chains we plan to put AGIs in and see how it goes.

[deleted]

My issue with prescribing personalities to our technologies is that people are idiosyncratic and want different things. The mistakes these companies are making are not innocuous but I think people are both so stunned and in competition that we accept it knowing it'll soon change.

I can imagine future models putting on different 'hats' for different use cases, thereby allowing parents to lock their kids out of generating certain content. Apple might come out with a suite of specialized AIs. I expect the truly open models will become more of a technical playground and that users will prefer the tailored AIs.

Sorry that my will to live hurts you

We aren’t pursuing it. It is an eventuality. We are approaching it.