You know how Google’s new feature called AI Overviews is prone to spitting out wildly incorrect answers to search queries? In one instance, AI Overviews told a user to use glue on pizza to make sure the cheese won’t slide off (pssst…please don’t do this.)...
I’m a mathematician who’s been following this stuff for about a decade or more. It’s not just expensive. Generative neural networks cannot reliably evaluate truth values; it will take time to research how to improve AI in this respect. This is a known limitation of the technology. Closely controlling the training data would certainly make the information more accurate, but that won’t stop it from hallucinating.
The real answer is that they shouldn’t be trying to answer questions using an LLM, especially because they had a decent algorithm already.
This is true, but when we’re talking about something that limited you’ll probably get better results with less work by using human-curated answers rather than generating a reply with an LLM.
I’m paraphrasing for effect. I’m specifically referencing his statements about why he joined the Spanish Civil War. I’m pretty sure he never said “every fascist should be shot” but it makes for a shocking surprise for a chud who thinks that antifa is “Orwellian” because they’re “the real fascists”.
This isn’t true. Both the Republicans and Democrats have had phases where they opposed the right wing. Lincoln was friends with Marx and FDR fought the Nazis. Also, it’s extremely damaging to draw equivalence between a flawed ally and an enemy you share no common ground with.
I’ve seen some (likely incorrect) renditions that depict it head-on like that. It’s a pelican feeding its young. The description for the crest is “A pelican Argent, winged Or, in her nest feeding her young, Proper.” a clearer picture makes the difference more obvious, but I’m sure you can understand how I got confused.
This is good, and I’m piggybacking so I can add on:
Get a passport, make friends in another country.
Vote to slow them down, yell at anyone who tries to say that it’s better to not vote or that Trump would be better for Palestinians.
If you want to engage in electoral reform, you need to start years in advance.
If you live in Texas: Vote for Biden and encourage GOP voters to not vote for Trump. If you’re in a place with lots of GOP weirdos, try publicly and loudly watch his rallies at 1.5x speed; I’ve heard it breaks the spell b/c his cadence gets disrupted. If Texas goes blue, Biden wins and all the DNC voters suddenly know they can win, making it immediately more likely.
If all else fails, remember someone might [Comment Cannot Legally Be Finished], which would solve multiple problems.
The research from Purdue University, first spotted by news outlet Futurism, was presented earlier this month at the Computer-Human Interaction Conference in Hawaii and looked at 517 programming questions on Stack Overflow that were then fed to ChatGPT....
I mean, AI eventually will take our jobs, and with any luck it’ll be a good thing when that happens. Just because Chat GPT v3 (or w/e) isn’t up to the task doesn’t mean v12 won’t be.
Considering that the average person would likely give answers slower and less accurately (most people know exactly 0 programming languages), being correct almost half of the time in seconds is a pretty impressive performance.
Yes, that’s exactly the scenario we need to avoid. Automated gay space communism would be ideal, but social democracy might do in a pinch. A sufficiently well-designed tax system coupled with a robust welfare system should make the transition survivable, but the danger with making that our goal is allowing the private firms enough political power that they can reverse the changes.
This is a fallacy. Specifically, I think you’re committing the informal fallacy confusion of necessary and sufficient conditions. That is to say, we know that if we can reliably simulate a human brain, then we can make an artificial sophont (this is true by mere definition). However, we have no idea what the minimum hardware requirements are for a sufficiently optimized program that runs a sapient mind. Note: I am setting aside what the definition of sapience is, because if you ask 2 different people you’ll get 20 different answers.
We shouldn’t take for granted it’s possible.
I’m pulling from a couple decades of philosophy and conservative estimates of the upper limits of what’s possible as well as some decently-founded plans on how it’s achievable. Suffice it to say, after immersing myself in these discussions for as long as I have I’m pretty thoroughly convinced that AI is not only possible but likely.
The canonical argument goes something like this: if brains are magic, we cannot say if humanlike AI is possible. If brains are not magic, then we know that natural processes can create sapience. Since natural processes can create sapience, it is extraordinarily unlikely that it will prove impossible to create it artificially.
So with our main premise (AI is possible) cogently established, we need to ask the question: “since it’s possible, will it be done, and if not why?” There are a great many advantages to AI, and while there are many risks, the barrier of entry for making progress is shockingly low. We are talking about the potential to create an artificial god with all the wonders and dangers that implies. It’s like a nuclear weapon if you didn’t need to source the uranium; everyone wants to have one, and no one wants their enemy to decide what it gets used for. So everyone has the insensitive to build it (it’s really useful) and everyone has a very powerful disincentive to forbidding the research (there’s no way to stop everyone who wants to, and so the people who’d listen are the people who would make an AI who’ll probably be friendly). So what possible scenario do we have that would mean strong general AI (let alone the simpler things that’d replace everyone’s jobs) never gets developed? The answers range from total societal collapse to extinction, which are all worse than a bad transition to full automation.
So either AI steals everyone’s job or something worse happens.
CEO of Google Says It Has No Solution for Its AI Providing Wildly Incorrect Information (futurism.com)
You know how Google’s new feature called AI Overviews is prone to spitting out wildly incorrect answers to search queries? In one instance, AI Overviews told a user to use glue on pizza to make sure the cheese won’t slide off (pssst…please don’t do this.)...
Back when America had a great tradition (i.imgur.com)
Total Recall (lemmy.world)
cross-posted from: lemmy.world/post/15748792...
"Very abnormal": Expert worries pro-Israel megadonors trying to make Dems a "pro-Netanyahu party" (www.salon.com)
Mammals (beehaw.org)
Nintendo reveals that the new Mario game will have a trans character (www.lgbtqnation.com)
a very emphatic answer (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
I support this transformation (lemmy.world)
13-year-old rape victim has baby amid confusion over state's abortion ban (abcnews.go.com)
Masochism (mander.xyz)
Trump Pledges to Free Silk Road Creator Ross Ulbricht If Re-Elected (www.msn.com)
Lauren Boebert tried to make a gay joke about Pete Buttigieg. It backfired completely. (www.lgbtqnation.com)
Mike Johnson flies same Christian nationalist flag outside his office that Samuel Alito flew at vacation home (www.advocate.com)
Americans, what's the plan if Trump wins the election in November? (serious)
ChatGPT Answers Programming Questions Incorrectly 52% of the Time: Study (gizmodo.com)
The research from Purdue University, first spotted by news outlet Futurism, was presented earlier this month at the Computer-Human Interaction Conference in Hawaii and looked at 517 programming questions on Stack Overflow that were then fed to ChatGPT....