Upvote!
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • Create Community
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Five@beehaw.org to Technology@beehaw.orgEnglish · 2 years ago

ChatGPT broke the Turing test — the race is on for new ways to assess AI

www.nature.com

external-link
message-square
223
fedilink
197
external-link

ChatGPT broke the Turing test — the race is on for new ways to assess AI

www.nature.com

Five@beehaw.org to Technology@beehaw.orgEnglish · 2 years ago
message-square
223
fedilink
Large language models mimic human chatter, but scientists disagree on their ability to reason.
  • lloram239@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    deleted by creator

    • Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦@mstdn.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      @lloram239 great. ChatGPT and other LLMs demonstrably lack the ability to model the world and make predictions based on such models:
      https://www.fastcompany.com/90877523/chatgpt-doesnt-know-what-its-saying

      Glad we agree they’re not intelligent, then!

      • lloram239@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator

        • Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦@mstdn.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          @lloram239

          > But human sensory inputs aren’t special

          It’s not about sensory inputs, it’s about having a model of the world and objects in it and ability to make predictions.

          > The important part is that the AI can figure out the pattern in the data it does get and so far AI systems are doing very well.

          GPT cannot “figure” anything out. That’s the point. It only probabilistically generates text. That’s what it does, there is no model of the world behind it, no predictions, no"figuring out".

          • lloram239@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            deleted by creator

            • Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦@mstdn.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              @lloram239 ah, so you’re down to throwing epithets like “idiotic” around. Clearly a mark of thoughtful and well-reasoned argument.

              > Predictions about the world are probabilistic by nature, since the future hasn’t happened yet.

              Thing is: GPT doesn’t make predictions about the world, it makes predictions about what the next word, phrase, sentence should be in a text, based on the prompt and the corpus it got “trained” on.

              • lloram239@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                deleted by creator

                • Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦@mstdn.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  @lloram239 that’s really akin to claiming that a mannequin is a human being because it really really looks alike.

                  The “predictions about the world” you refer to here are instead predictions about the text. They are not based on a model of the world, they are based on loads and loads of text the model was trained on.

                  I don’t have to prove ChatGPT is not intelligent. That would be proving a negative. The burden of proof is on those claiming that it is intelligent.

                  • lloram239@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    deleted by creator

Technology@beehaw.org

technology@beehaw.org

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@beehaw.org

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

  • Free and Open Source Software
  • Programming
  • Operating Systems

This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 256 users / day
  • 1.54K users / week
  • 3.21K users / month
  • 7.7K users / 6 months
  • 1 local subscriber
  • 38.6K subscribers
  • 3.99K Posts
  • 79.8K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.org
  • TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
  • gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
  • rs5th@beehaw.org
  • coldredlight@beehaw.org
  • Leigh@beehaw.org
  • TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
  • Chris Remington@beehaw.org
  • BE: 0.19.6
  • Modlog
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org