I'm sorry, ID. A dead end isn't necessarily a failure, though, not if you learned something. Sometimes we have to go down a path just to find out that there's a wall at the end.
You think it "should have been easy for others to explain" that the wall was there, but are you sure? Communication is a challenge that takes skill, like any other. Complex or abstract things can be difficult to describe. You also seem to be assuming that GPT *could* be turned from 6000 lines of code into 300. Why? I guess the authors *might* have accidentally bloated the code by 20x, but I'd say it's far more likely that most of those 6000 lines are important. I can't explain GPT to you because I haven't studied the gritty details of it. I haven't studied them because I am not interested and do not have time. I prefer my own project, and if I were going to study and extend somebody else's, I would probably pick NARS. I'm afraid that's just how it is - that's the kind of AI I like. I'm not exactly *trying* to outrun Google and OpenAI ... I don't know if we're even in the same race. I'm working on something I like for the joy of it, not just chasing performance/utility. ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tc124b3d00b83e897-M4d47136ddc09619d4aeeeb4e Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
