Maybe they should try using Claude 3.5 Sonnet to write more secure code for their systems. I’ve heard it’s the best LLM out there when it comes to coding 🤡

Sorry to give you false hope 😔

But I still believe that we’ll get at least one video this year! 😭

No but you see he is a visionary! A real life Tony Stark!! He’ll do great things with that money like… Making Twitter X likes private for some reason…? I’m sure that cost a lot of money somehow /s

Not my favorite community but I wish !writingprompts@lemmy.world had more engagement. It was really cool on Reddit and I wish it got more love here as well. I’d participate too but I can’t write for shit.

Also !frogpics@lemmy.world

Cute little slimy fellas

This did happen a while back, with researchers finding thousands of hashes of CSAM images in LAION-2B. Still, IIRC it was something like a fraction of a fraction of 1%, and they weren’t actually available in the dataset because they had already been removed from the internet.

You could still make AI CSAM even if you were 100% sure that none of the training images included it since that’s what these models are made for - being able to combine concepts without needing to have seen them before. If you hold the AI’s hand enough with prompt engineering, textual inversion and img2img you can get it to generate pretty much anything. That’s the power and danger of these things.

IIRC it was something like a fraction of a fraction of 1% that was CSAM, with the researchers identifying the images through their hashes but they weren’t actually available in the dataset because they had already been removed from the internet.

Still, you could make AI CSAM even if you were 100% sure that none of the training images included it since that’s what these models are made for - being able to combine concepts without needing to have seen them before. If you hold the AI’s hand enough with prompt engineering, textual inversion and img2img you can get it to generate pretty much anything. That’s the power and danger of these things.

Honestly I’m already not a big fan of Windows 10 so if Microsoft tries to force me to download Windows 11 with all these nonsense AI features that spy on you I’m just gonna switch to Linux

“Let the bodies pile up in the streets” but unironically

Freest* country on earth baby!

* Free to fuck the working class, that is.

Mercedes also better support UBI so that these workers who will lose their jobs to automation don’t starve to death.

Why yes I do in fact (In Arma)

I know the second definition was proposed by OpenAI, who obviously has a vested interest in this topic, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be a useful or informative conceptualization of AGI, after all we have to set some threshold for the amount of intelligence AI needs to display and in what areas for it to be considered an AGI. Their proposal of an autonomous system that surpasses humans in economically valuable tasks is fairly reasonable, though it’s still pretty vague and very much debatable, which is why this isn’t the only definition that’s been proposed.

Your definition is definitely more peculiar as I’ve never seen anyone else propose something like it, and it also seems to exclude humans since you’re referring to problems we can’t solve.

The next question then is what problems specifically AI would need to solve to fit your definition, and with what accuracy. Do you mean solve any problem we can throw at it? At that point we’d be going past AGI and now we’re talking about artificial superintelligence…

Not only has it not been proven whether LLMs will lead to AGI, it hasn’t even been proven that AGIs are possible.

By your definition AGI doesn’t really seem possible at all. But of course, your definition isn’t how most data scientists or people in general conceptualize AGI, which is the point of my comment. It’s very difficult to put a clear-cut line on what AGI is or isn’t, which is why there are those like you who believe it will never be possible, but there are also those who argue it’s already here.

No it can’t. If the task requires the LLM to solve a problem that hasn’t been solved before, it will fail.

Ask an LLM to solve a problem without a known solution and it will fail.

That’s simply not true. That’s the whole point of the concept of generalization in AI and what the few-shot and zero-shot metrics represent - LLMs solving problems represented in text with few or no prior examples by reasoning beyond what they saw in the training data. You can actually test this yourself by simply signing up to use ChatGPT since it’s free.

Exams often are bad measures of intelligence. They typically measure your ability to consume, retain, and recall facts. LLMs are very good at that.

So are humans. We’re also deterministic machines that output some action depending on the inputs we get through our senses, much like an LLM outputs some text depending on the inputs it received, plus as I mentioned they can reason beyond what they’ve seen in the training data.

The ability to interact with physical objects is very clearly not a good test for general intelligence and I never claimed otherwise.

I wasn’t accusing you of anything, I was just pointing out that there are many things we can argue require some degree of intelligence, even physical tasks. The example in the video requires understanding the instructions, the environment, and how to move the robotic arm in order to complete new instructions.

I find LLMs and AGI interesting subjects and was hoping to have a conversation on the nuances of these topics, but it’s pretty clear that you just want to turn this into some sort of debate to “debunk” AGI, so I’ll be taking my leave.

Depends on what you mean by general intelligence. I’ve seen a lot of people confuse Artificial General Intelligence and AI more broadly. Even something as simple as the K-nearest neighbor algorithm is artificial intelligence, as this is a much broader topic than AGI.

Wikipedia gives two definitions of AGI:

An artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a hypothetical type of intelligent agent which, if realized, could learn to accomplish any intellectual task that human beings or animals can perform. Alternatively, AGI has been defined as an autonomous system that surpasses human capabilities in the majority of economically valuable tasks.

If some task can be represented through text, an LLM can, in theory, be trained to perform it either through fine-tuning or few-shot learning. The question then is how general do LLMs have to be for one to consider them to be AGIs, and there’s no hard metric for that question.

I can’t pass the bar exam like GPT-4 did, and it also has a lot more general knowledge than me. Sure, it gets stuff wrong, but so do humans. We can interact with physical objects in ways that GPT-4 can’t, but it is catching up. Plus Stephen Hawking couldn’t move the same way that most people can either and we certainly wouldn’t say that he didn’t have general intelligence.

I’m rambling but I think you get the point. There’s no clear threshold or way to calculate how “general” an AI has to be before we consider it an AGI, which is why some people argue that the best LLMs are already examples of general intelligence.

Well yeah Andy Ngo does literally hang out with fascists so that’s a given lol

Dragons in American folklore:

There’s also a non-insignificant chance that he likes horse cock: https://youtu.be/-9QYu8LtH2E?t=373

What?

deleted by creator

I haven’t used Facebook in years, but I still use Twitter because most lefties and furries I follow either haven’t moved to Bsky/Mastodon, or have moved but are inactive.

I still have an account on Bsky though, but I don’t use it that often.

Smash.