frequenttimetraveler
frequenttimetraveler t1_jds97ia wrote
Why don't we ask gpt4 to optimize itself
frequenttimetraveler t1_jds91rc wrote
Reply to comment by light24bulbs in [D] Do we really need 100B+ parameters in a large language model? by Vegetable-Skill-9700
Number of synapses is more akin to parameters
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdo9gw5 wrote
Reply to [N] GPT-4 has 1 trillion parameters by mrx-ai
Altman did not say anything about that in Lex Fridman show. He said the 100T rumor was just a meme
How would run time scale with parameter size? Can we infer if 1T is true from the latency of the responses?
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdjho9s wrote
Reply to comment by nixed9 in [D] I just realised: GPT-4 with image input can interpret any computer screen, any userinterface and any combination of them. by Balance-
I believe the full gpt4 can already do that https://mobile.twitter.com/gdb/status/1638971232443076609?s=20
But wait until they hook up robot arms to it
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdjhhz8 wrote
Reply to comment by ginger_beer_m in [D] I just realised: GPT-4 with image input can interpret any computer screen, any userinterface and any combination of them. by Balance-
It will also render chatGpt plugins obsolete. The chat will replace them by simply using the browser.
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdjhb4b wrote
Reply to comment by itsnotlupus in [D] I just realised: GPT-4 with image input can interpret any computer screen, any userinterface and any combination of them. by Balance-
Automatic tech support will be huge. Print screen, then 'computer, fix this problem'.
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdh09hf wrote
Reply to comment by Maleficent_Refuse_11 in [D] "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4" contained unredacted comments by QQII
Yeah this is like looking at the linux kernel binary and seeing patterns of clouds in it. It makes zero sense to psychoanalyze a bunch of optimized vectors and to pretend to be Shamans or medieval alchemists. We better stick to scientific arguments about it
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdh03vc wrote
Reply to [D] "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4" contained unredacted comments by QQII
DV3? Darth Vader III? I knew it
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdewdks wrote
Reply to comment by ai_fanatic_2023 in [N] ChatGPT plugins by Singularian2501
NotOpenAI will have to figure out a way for people to make money from the process though. Expedia can get traffic from it, but why would a content website feed its data to the bot? It's not getting any ad revenue from traffic .
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdemv5n wrote
Reply to comment by RedditLovingSun in [N] ChatGPT plugins by Singularian2501
Google will more likely come up with its own version of this. It's already in every android phone and the iphone search box. It's a natural fit
Despite being there first, microsoft will have a hard time when google gatekeeps everything
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdekst3 wrote
Reply to comment by race2tb in [N] ChatGPT plugins by Singularian2501
> Why do I need a website if I can just feed model my info have it generate everything when people want my content.
It will be a big deal if openAI pays for content.
frequenttimetraveler t1_jdekma7 wrote
Reply to [N] ChatGPT plugins by Singularian2501
Does this turn ChatGPT to WeChatGPT?
If this means the end of Apps, i m all for it
frequenttimetraveler t1_jcewwlh wrote
Reply to comment by MrEloi in [D] ChatGPT responds to criticisms of GPT-4's high test scores. by spiritus_dei
chatGpt is good at writing nice-looking prose. That doesn't mean its content is actually good, just well-ornamented.
In real life, people who are uneducated are bad at both reasoning and language expression. People who are generall well-educated are good at both. chatGPT ain't like us
frequenttimetraveler t1_jcewp2n wrote
Chatgpt itself ain't better. One thing chatGPT struggles with is jeopardy-like queries, where you give an answer and ask the question. It failed even with simple answers like "four neutrinos".
Bing however (which I assume is running gpt4) is good at it
frequenttimetraveler t1_jbljl97 wrote
Have they tried to train the same model with half the tokens?
frequenttimetraveler t1_jb60ifw wrote
Reply to What is the future of AI in medicine? [D] by adityyya13
I mean, you left the biggest blocker in the last place. It's amazing that in 2023 a visit to the doctor involves measuring blood pressure and 'listening' to your lungs. My guess is the first mass medical devices will be pirated from some awkward place because regulators won't approve them for sale. Isn't it the same reason why the iphone cant even measure SpO2 ?
And then you have the "AI Safety" mob which will prevent life-saving devices because they are biased to the blood samples of rich country dwellers.
Considering the general lack of progress in how physicians work for decades (vs the progress in drug and diagnostic devices), it seems these blockers will linger for a while
Also, consider COVID. Despite having billions and billions of cases, relatively very few studies have emerged that use same procedurs for measuring indicators, because doctors tend to stick to old, incompatible methods despite the availability of more modern alternatives. Or something like long covid, which despite billions of cases as well, is relatively understudied because records of cases were not taken, wasnt even recognized as a condition for many, and too many MDs rely on their "hunch".
In short, the Medical profession has not embraced AI , which is a requirement
frequenttimetraveler t1_jamt1lj wrote
Reply to Network states (countries that are cloud-first, land last) could see genuine traction in the next 5-10 years. A combination of remote work, crowdfunding, offgrid tech and more make it so that communities could find each other online and then purchase enough land to form a new country. Do you buy it? by istegerjf
May take more than ten years however. They need guns, lots of distributed guns
frequenttimetraveler t1_jalqh95 wrote
Well in a way they are 'coming true'. He is now a professional fearmonger for pay
frequenttimetraveler t1_jae8dyo wrote
Reply to Scientists unveil plan to create biocomputers powered by human brain cells - Now, scientists unveil a revolutionary path to drive computing forward: organoid intelligence, where lab-grown brain organoids act as biological hardware by Gari_305
> Despite AI’s impressive track record, its computational power pales in comparison with a human brain.
This is not true , no human can do what an 1TB model can do. There doesnt seem to be any limit in sight to scaling and extending AI models, as opposed to humans and other brains.
Organoids don't have anatomy, layering and connectivity, which our brain does. a giant unstructured clump of neurons is not necessarily smarter (like elephants or dolphins)
> Dr Brett Kagan of the Cortical Labs
This team used an organoid to 'learn' to play the game of Pong last year, but there is a lot left to be desired in that paper. The extent to which it 'learned' (rather than adapted slightly) is debateable, as are the consequences of their findings
frequenttimetraveler t1_j6zjmza wrote
Reply to comment by gyanster in [N] Microsoft integrates GPT 3.5 into Teams by bikeskata
It looks like you 're trying to get censored
frequenttimetraveler t1_j6ziww8 wrote
Reply to comment by visarga in [N] Microsoft integrates GPT 3.5 into Teams by bikeskata
Chatgpt can be imperfect on cue
frequenttimetraveler t1_j6ykioh wrote
Reply to comment by ThunderySleep in [N] Microsoft integrates GPT 3.5 into Teams by bikeskata
I'm looking forward to finding out that peopel who write nice letters and look good on cam are just as dumb as the minions they manage.
frequenttimetraveler t1_j6xnm9i wrote
Reply to comment by TrevorIRL in [N] OpenAI starts selling subscriptions to its ChatGPT bot by bikeskata
20%? More like 2% (the whales)
This seems like an uninspired monetization strategy. But it's alright , it s still very early days , time will tell
frequenttimetraveler t1_j6x5bdf wrote
Reply to [N] Microsoft integrates GPT 3.5 into Teams by bikeskata
Oh well, now every employee can talk like a manager
frequenttimetraveler t1_je98v80 wrote
Reply to [D] What do you think about all this hype for ChatGPT? by Dear-Vehicle-3215
People care about power so they won't stop talking about it. It's frankly irrelevant noise. Imagine horse breeders pontificating about the future of transportation in the 19th century. It had zero effect in the development of the car