izumi3682 OP t1_ix7y5pa wrote
Submission statement from OP. Note: This submission statement "locks in" after about 30 minutes, and can no longer be edited. Please refer to my statement they link, which I can continue to edit. I often edit my submission statement, sometimes for the next few days if needs must. There is often required additional grammatical editing and additional added detail.
From the article.
>The possibility of GPT-4 being multimodal—such as accepting audio, text, image, and even video inputs—is anticipated. Moreover, there is an assumption that audio datasets from Open AI’s Whisper will be utilised to create the textual data needed to train GPT4.
And this.
>The major plot twist, however, is whether this entire article was written by GPT-4.
I have the perfect analogy for understanding the difference in performance between GPT-3 and GPT-4. I first read of it when understanding the difference between 4G and 5G.
The difference in performance capabilities between GPT-3 and GPT-4 is the difference between a very fast horse--and a slow jet. By the way, true 5G towers are starting to sprout up all over the US. They are big and disfiguring to neighborhoods.
And I'm pretty sure the next iteration/derivation of GPT style AI technology is more than a paper by this point. You might find the below interesting. Some background of the milieu and some thoughts I put down.
TL;DR: GPT-3 and 4, when it comes out, are but a small facet of what is coming into existence. The ARA, that is computing derived AI, robotics and automation are going to see things, in just the next 1-2 years alone, that are going to beyond belief today. To say nothing of what it will be like by the year 2025. Not only is this not hype, but I'm pretty sure I am greatly underestimating the impact on society of these advances. Further, China (PRC) doesn't openly discuss what they are up to.
ovirt001 t1_ix859qz wrote
> By the way, true 5G towers are starting to sprout up all over the US. They are big and disfiguring to neighborhoods.
"True" 5G towers have been deployed in dense areas for the last two years. C-Band is great and offers an improvement in the US specifically (most other countries had already allowed this band). mmWave isn't useful outside of niche cases. Neither of these are going to fix the coverage problem and only mmWave is fast enough to do all the high-bandwidth things touted for 5G. Of course it doesn't reach far enough to be particularly useful.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments