What are you talking about? GPT-4 speaks like 100 languages.

There are also a lot of humans that don’t though. It’s not a structural problem.

No lol. A better way to illustrate what I am saying is that if you learn how addition works, then if you ever see 2+2=5 you can know it is wrong and reject that data. LLMs cannot, they consider everything equally. And no, there is no number system where 2+2=5 that is not how bases work.

What's your point?

If it has understanding, it is a strange, statistical-based understanding that doesn't align with what many people think of as rational intelligence. For instance, a LLM can learn that 2+2=4 by seeing it a bunch of times in its input. But, you can also convince it that 2+2=5 by telling it that is true enough times. It cannot take a prior rule and use it to discard future data. Eventually, new data will overwrite the old understanding.

It doesn't have the ability to take a simple logical postulate and apply it consistently to discover new things. Because there are no things that are absolutely true to a LLM. It is purely statistical, which always leads to some chance to conflict with itself ("hallucinating" they call it).

This is probably why we need a more sophisticated multi-part AI system to really achieve AGI. LLMs are great at what they do, but what they do is not everything. Language is flexible and imprecise, so statistical modeling works great for it. Other things are not, and LLMs tend to fail there.

You forgot about the part where OP said, "smart about what AI is and isn't currently capable of."

I have access to GPT4, I’m not making this stuff up. Here are three from poking around, but keep in mind it will pretend to know the answer to anything it is just wrong when you ask it to explain the details. It will not match with actual fact, I.e. what is in Wikipedia.

What is an oblivious tree?

What is the population of Goleh-ye Cheshmeh?

Where was the 65th governor of Delaware born?

This is completely wrong. Wikipedia has a lot more in depth information than GPT does. Try asking GPT about obscure facts some time.

No, I'm sorry, you are confused my dude. Give two 6 digit numbers to multiply and it only gets the first 3-4 digits correct. That is .1-1% error. I just did it 10 times and it is the same every time.

I'm sorry, from my perspective here is how our conversation went:

You: GPT4 is really good at arithmetic.

Me: It's not though, it gets multiplication wrong for any number with more than a few digits.

You: I tried it a bunch and it gets it the first few numbers right.

Me: Yeah but the first few numbers right is not right. It is wrong. Like I said.

You can't claim you are good at math if you only get a few significant digits of a calculation right. That is not good at math. It is bad at math. I feel like I am taking crazy pills.

How does "exactly right" square with "4 sig figs." That's another way of saying wrong.

Thank you! I have commented this exact thing about a billion times on all these posts and nobody seems to get it.

It's really not. Just pick any two large numbers and ask it to multiply them. It will get the first couple digits of the result right but then it just goes off the rails.

Prior to COVID, math scores in the US were consistently trending upward for 20 years. COVID definitely knocked everything off track, but I don’t think your statement is true in general.

I don't know, did people stop learning arithmetic when the calculator was invented? Does nobody play sudoku since a computer can just solve it instantly? Do we not care about good chess players since they can never beat the computer?

Too bad it doesn’t support audio yet. Also there are other AI models specifically for subtitling.

If that’s true when why didn’t Brandon Scott come out and explain that to everyone? The only reason he would push it through over the complaint of literally everyone, without a statement, is because it must be some degree of shady.

How does this let them push their agenda any more or less than before?

How do you know this wasn’t just getting lucky with the random unsynchronized lights lining up for you?

Does this happen in the 19 states that already have recall elections?

I have never seen a single person that wasn’t on his payroll say the move is good. He didn’t even try to justify to us why it would be good, he just forced it through over the objections of the comptroller and the city council. It seems like an obviously corrupt action that we are going to be reading about in two years when it comes out that BGE bought him a vacation house or something.

You make a very good point about short term vs long term goals, but what do we do then? How do we get politicians to actually do what they promise? How do we stop them from being so nakedly corrupt? It’s so frustrating.

That is not true. A minority can call the election (because you can’t be expected to get hundreds of thousands of signatures) but it still takes a majority vote to actually recall.

How do we counter the constant stream of corrupt politicians we somehow end up with then? I was excited about Brandon Scott but now he is directly going against the voters and the city council to sell our conduits to BGE and we have no recourse. If we had the possibility to recall him I bet he would not be so brazenly corrupt.

Once again why do you think Sinclair gets to choose? You are so confused my guy. They have no impact on who the voters get to pick.

In California they used it to recall the judge that let Brock Turner off. They also recalled lots of politicians that failed to live up to their campaign promises, which seems awesome to me. Right now there is zero recourse for a politician that promises something and then does a 180 on it immediately upon getting elected.