The Rowan Atkinson thing isnât misunderstanding, itâs understanding but having been misled. Iâve literally done this exact thing myself, say something was a hoax (because in the past it was) but then it turned out there was newer info I didnât know about. Iâm not convinced LLMs as they exist today donât prioritize sources â if trained naively, sure, but these days they can, for instance, integrate search results, and can update on new information. If the LLM can answer correctly only after checking a web search, and I can do the same only after checking a web search, thatâs a score of 1-1.
because we know what âunderstandingâ is
Really? Who claims to know what understanding is? Do you think itâs possible there can ever be an AI (even if different from an LLM) which is capable of âunderstanding?â How can you tell?
KeenFlame@feddit.nu â¨2⊠â¨days⊠ago
Just if you were a hater that would be cool with me. I donât like âaiâ either. The explanations you give are misleading at best. Itâs embarrassing. You fail to realise the fact that NOBODY KNOWS why or how they work. Itâs just extreme folly to pretend you know these things. Itâs been observed to reason novel ideas which is why it is confusing for scientists that work with them why it happens. Itâs not just data lookup. You think entire Web and history of man fits in 8 gb? You are just educating people with just your basic rage filled opinion, not actual answers. You are angry at the discovery, we get that. You donât believe in it. Ok. But donât say you know what it does and how, or what openai does behind its closed doors. Itâs just embarrassing. We are working on papers to try to explain the emergent phenomenon we discovered in neural nets that make it seem like it can reason and output mostly correct answers to difficult questions. Itâs not in the âdataâ and it looks for it. You could just start learning if you want to be an educator in the field.