Recent comments in /f/singularity

Glad_Laugh_5656 t1_j9igems wrote

Reply to comment by CustardNearby in OpenAI has privately announced a new developer product called Foundry by flowday

If you believe that, then you either aren't very familiar with labor or aren't very familiar with ChatGPT (or both).

I agree with funprize (another redditor who also replied to your comment) that while a future version could someday be a threat to a lot of workers, this one (even if it's finetuned) probably won't.

3

Wyrade t1_j9ig088 wrote

Reply to OpenAI has privately announced a new developer product called Foundry by flowday

Can someone explain the pricing for me?

I'm just a random guy, not in business, but I'm curious.

For example, is gpt3.5 turbo 100 computing units per instance, costing $26/month PLUS $260/month per unit, meaning $26026 per month for a single instance? And how many people can a single instance serve?

The above doesn't sound right to me, but I'm confused.

5

Borrowedshorts t1_j9ifeym wrote

Reply to comment by Desperate_Food7354 in Does anyone else have unrelenting hope for the technological singularity because they’ve lost faith in everything else? by bablebooee

It has. It has also caused irreparable harm. It has changed societies and social conventions and behaviors. In the past, technological change was observable over a generational time period. That generational time scale of major technical change is now being condensed to a period of less than a year. People had time to adjust in the past, and yet segments of society still found it hard to. People won't have that luxury anymore, as the pace of change will reorganize the social fabric faster than we can conceive.

1

crua9 t1_j9ibw4y wrote

Reply to comment by xott in Two Deans suspended after using ChatGPT to write email to students by Neurogence

>To be honest, I think if they hadn't included the 'made by ChatGPT' disclaimer, no one would have even known it was generated by AI. It's not like the email lacked feeling or anything.

I honestly wonder if after a few months or whatever, they will just do it again but not include the disclaimer. Maybe throw it in quiltbot for extra measure.

16

onlyconscripted t1_j9ibgyb wrote

Reply to Transhumanism - Why I believe it is the solution by the_alex197

every company looking at brain to computer connections is driving towards this, either deliberately, or not...

though, i dont actually agree with assumption 1. its possible. it might happen by the end of this year/decade/century. outside of maths, nothing is actually inevitable.

1

turnip_burrito t1_j9ia6os wrote

Reply to Transhumanism - Why I believe it is the solution by the_alex197

We will get AGI before we are able to digitize human brains. Brain scanning technology is incredibly bad and not improving quickly enough. We'd also need hardware to emulate the brain once we have the data. We have no clue how to do that, either.

We will get AGI before we genetically engineer superintelligent children. Unless a government research lab somewhere ignores this problem and tries anyway.

We are going to have to confront the control problem as regular human beings.

1

turnip_burrito t1_j9i94b1 wrote

Reply to comment by TFenrir in OpenAI has privately announced a new developer product called Foundry by flowday

Now you got me excited about 2-3 years from now when the order of magnitude jumps 10x again or more.

Right now that's a good amount. But when it ncreases again by 10x, that would be enough to handle multiple very large papers, or a whole medium size novel plus some.

In any case, say hello to loading tons of extra info into short term context to improve information synthesis.

You could also do computations within the context window by running mini "LLM programs" within it while working on a larger problem, using it as a workspace to solve a problem.

52