Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

E_Snap t1_j650ns8 wrote

Given the pace at which the field of AI is moving, even by the week, that is a useless point to make. Chances are your complaints have already been solved and the paper is just waiting to be published.

−2

quantumfucker t1_j66t46q wrote

Just because we can land on the moon doesn’t mean we can land on the sun. Fact-checking requires deductively analyzing a set of propositions. The way this AI currently works is inference based on probability. That’s not the kind of gap you can bridge in a couple weeks.

2

E_Snap t1_j673m3l wrote

And in 2016, people thought it would be insane to reuse a rocket booster. What’s your point?

−1

quantumfucker t1_j679eqy wrote

That you can’t assume everything is possible just because some impressive things have happened. These breakthroughs didn’t come out of nowhere, they’re based in very sound and rigorous theories. You have provided none as to how or why a language model would be able to logically verify what it produces. You’re just vaguely gesturing at the fact breakthroughs exist.

0