I know the above seems like low level is too low but really the 3rd paragraph 
above is the actual how AI works, the beneath that is the details it runs, the 
2 paragraphs above the 3rd are more implementation details e.g. how Backprop 
works and what criteria they use as in second paragraph (to ground the 
Backprop). The 3rd paragraph is the actual reason for any algorithm though, 
because we use matches and predictions from sentences to get the final result, 
backprop is explained like a mess and so is other mechanisms, this is not what 
the key picture is.

For the most part GPT seems pretty close to my AI and I think they or others do 
understand their AI well, but the explanation and way it works still lacks, 
even if I can get it our of a paper or person it still will disappoint me how 
GPT exactly works, backprop just seems a bit the wrong way, I don't like it, I 
have another powerful way clearly being uncovered from what I can see so far. I 
still think they don't understand why they sue backprop etc, none can explain 
them, in fact I'm possibly the best AGI researcher that has ever 
lived...literally no one else can explain AGI... Matt's side and some articles 
on GPT explain a lot but the GPT explanations are just gotten out the 
numskulls, like they tried their hardest and is broken and barely made it out 
their mouths onto paper. Not impressed at all with explanations of GPT. Ya. And 
their way they do it seems a bit wrong. That's how I feel. I still know what to 
do, I pretty much know every mechanism in GPT and not in GPT. The 
implementation method too, but mine is different as said. I don't even know if 
they know why they use some things n GPT. But I see them and know why they are 
there.
------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T73cb0deded02df8c-M55214a593f6eee98968c9022
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Reply via email to