That doesn’t really count, lol. The reality is, we’ve already killed ourselves, we just won’t admit it yet. The climate effects we’re seeing today aren’t even from recent emissions. Mr. Bones Wild Ride has only just begun, and there’s no getting off.
If you legitimately believe llms “understand” anything at all, I really don’t believe there’s anything to discuss with you. That is a completely absurd notion at this stage.
Well, why don’t you argue with the guy who spearheaded the backpropagation algorithm, spends his whole day thinking about it and who won the Nobel Prize in Physics, rather than me? I’m not saying some fanciful notion that isn’t supported by evidence. If they just predict text, how can they solve riddles theyve never encountered in their training materials? Are you claiming the logic solution is just text statistics?
Predictive text algorithms will not wipe out humanity. 🙄
The problem isn’t the technology. The problem is the people losing their minds about it.
https://www.techspot.com/news/105031-former-google-ceo-ai-data-centers-environmental-impact.html
That doesn’t really count, lol. The reality is, we’ve already killed ourselves, we just won’t admit it yet. The climate effects we’re seeing today aren’t even from recent emissions. Mr. Bones Wild Ride has only just begun, and there’s no getting off.
Maybe the Nobel should have went to you.
The prize has nothing to do with these claims. Furthermore, past accomplishments do not make a person infallible. Nice ad hominem, though.
Such a lame hot take. Do you understand how language models work? To claim there’s no higher order understanding is frankly laughable.
If you legitimately believe llms “understand” anything at all, I really don’t believe there’s anything to discuss with you. That is a completely absurd notion at this stage.
Well, why don’t you argue with the guy who spearheaded the backpropagation algorithm, spends his whole day thinking about it and who won the Nobel Prize in Physics, rather than me? I’m not saying some fanciful notion that isn’t supported by evidence. If they just predict text, how can they solve riddles theyve never encountered in their training materials? Are you claiming the logic solution is just text statistics?