No the argument is current techniques give logarithmic returns in data size, which is bad. But it said nothing about other potential techniques or made any suggestion that this was a general result.
Comment on Has Generative AI Already Peaked? - Computerphile
Murvel@lemm.ee 4 months agoWhat you mentioned is assumed video and paper in question. The main argument being that no matter our computational techniques, the diminishing returns in predictive precision is reached far sooner than we achieve general intelligence.
Womble@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Murvel@lemm.ee 4 months ago
Well obviously they cannot rule out techniques no one has though of but likewise they obviously accounted for what they deemed to be within the realm of possibility
boyi@lemmy.sdf.org 4 months ago
Thar very bold presumption. How can they be so sure of this, that any future models can tackle the issue? have they got proof or something.
Murvel@lemm.ee 4 months ago
No, they just calculate with increased size of the training roster… it’s not that complicated. Which is a fair presumption as that is how we’ve increased the predictive precision so far.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 months ago
It seems far more bold to presume that we’ll achieve general intelligence any time soon when technology is nowhere close.