Robin wrote:
> As pointed out near the beginning of this thread, while current processors
> don't come near the number of neurons a human
> has, they more than make up for it in speed.
I do not think so. The total number of neurons dictates how much complexity
the neural network can deal
On average, the human brain contains about 100 billion neurons and many
more neuroglia which serve to support and protect the neurons. Each neuron
may be connected to up to 10,000 other neurons, passing signals to each
other via as many as 1,000 trillion synapses.
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 3 Apr 2023 14:46:33 -0400:
Hi,
Rather than trying to compare apples with oranges, why not just look at how
long it takes ChatGPT & a human to perform
the same task, e.g. holding a conversation.
Compare the time it takes you to respond in your
Oops, missed that
On Mon, Apr 3, 2023, 2:47 PM Jed Rothwell wrote:
> I wrote:
>
>
>> The human brain has 86 billion neurons, all operating simultaneously. In
>> other words, complete parallel processing with 86 billion "processors"
>> operating simultaneously. ChatGPT tells us she has 175
Terry Blanton wrote:
On average, the human brain contains about 100 billion neurons and many
> more neuroglia which serve to support and protect the neurons. Each neuron
> may be connected to up to 10,000 other neurons, passing signals to each
> other via as many as 1,000 trillion synapses.
I wrote:
> The human brain has 86 billion neurons, all operating simultaneously. In
> other words, complete parallel processing with 86 billion "processors"
> operating simultaneously. ChatGPT tells us she has 175 billion
> parameters in Version 3. I assume each parameter is roughly equivalent
Robin wrote:
> Rather than trying to compare apples with oranges, why not just look at
> how long it takes ChatGPT & a human to perform
> the same task, e.g. holding a conversation.
>
You cannot tell, because she is holding conversations with many people at
the same time. I do not know how
We must not forget that it is not human intelligence. It requires an
absurdly large amount of data to match what it can be achieved with
relatively very little input in humans, like, with learning languages. On
the other hand, it can learn an arbitrarily large number of languages
provided enough
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 3 Apr 2023 16:31:29 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>> Perhaps you could try asking ChatGPT if it's alive? The answer should be
>> interesting.
>>
>
>She will say no, even if she is actually sentient. She's programmed that
>way, as Dave said to the BBC in the movie
Robin wrote:
> >> Perhaps you could try asking ChatGPT if it's alive? The answer should be
> >> interesting.
> >>
> >
> >She will say no, even if she is actually sentient. She's programmed that
> >way, as Dave said to the BBC in the movie "2001."
>
> I had hoped that you would actually pose the
10 matches
Mail list logo
