Am Mo, 20. Mär 2023, um 14:28, schrieb Jason Resch: > The video John shared is worth watching. This is significant. It is now > solving complex math problems which requires a long sequence of steps.
I agree that it is significant and extremely impressive. I never said the opposite. What baffles me is that John is now requiring religious reverence towards a scientific result, and criticizing when I ask questions that are part of the same standard machine learning methodology that got us here. > Over-fitting is less of an issue here because it's trivial to write a > sentence that's never before been written by any human in history. That is not enough. A small variation on a standard IQ test is still the same IQ test for a super powerful pattern detector such as GPT-4. I have no doubt that GPT-4 can generalize in its domain. It was rigorously designed and tested for that by people who know what they are doing. My doubt is that you can give it an IQ test and claim OMG GPT-4 IQ > 140. This is just silly and it is junk science. > You can tweak the parameters of the problem to guarantee it's a problem it > has never before been seen, and it can still solve it. Some yes, some no. Almost one century of computer science still applies. > You can choose to wait for the academic write ups to come out a few months > down the line but by then things will have advanced another few levels from > where we are today. I am not wanting to wait for anything, I am asking questions that can be addressed right now: - Are there IQ tests in the training data of GPT-4. Yes or no? - Can we conceive of human-level intelligence without recurrent connections or some form of ongoing recursivity / Turing completeness? Yes or no? In any case, all of this discussion will become moot in a few weeks. Telmo > I think it's worth paying attention to the latest results, even if it means > having to watch some YouTube videos. > > Jason > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023, 9:19 AM John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 7:00 AM Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.net> wrote: >> >>> >*** I want to discuss scientific research and peer-reviews academic >>> >articles, but you want me to get excited about YouTube clickbait instead. >>> >What happened to you John?* >> >> I'll tell you exactly what happened to me, last Tuesday happened to me. And >> by the way, refusing to look at something does not make it go away. >> >> GPT-4 solving hard riddles <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoyqRiGL4pg> >> >>> *> You are SUPER EXCITED abou ChatGPT but you do not give a shit about the >>> fundamentals of machine learning* >> >> You are absolutely correct. When it comes to judging it's intelligence I >> don't give a shit about how GPT4 works, *I CARE ABOUT WHAT GPT4 DOES* >> because behavior is the only way we have of judging the intelligence of our >> fellow human beings, and that is also the only way we have of judging the >> intelligence of a computer program. All I'm saying is that regardless of how >> something works, if it's behaving intelligently then it's intelligent. >> That's true for people and it's also true for computers, and I think it's >> bizarre that some people think that is a controversial statement. >>> > *Human beings can form coherent memories and are capable of long-term >>> > goals, strategy and slow thinking -- the Turing complete kind.* >> >> All computers are Turing Machines so obviously they are also Turing complete. >> >>> *> I have even seen people now claim that ChatGPT is good at chess. It is >>> incredibly good at chess given that it is a language model trained with >>> chess books* >> >> Wow, that's a remarkably weak argument, computers have had the ability to >> beat any human being at chess for a quarter of a century! It would be >> trivially easy for GPT4 to offload the problem to AlphaZero which can start >> with zero knowledge of chess and after an hour or two of thinking about it >> play the game at a superhuman level. Then for GPT4 playing chess (or any >> board game) at a super human level would be a simple reflex just as for us >> breathing is a simple reflex. >> >>> > * It is capable of navigating a min-max tree? Of course not, because it >>> > lacks recurrence. It cannot possibly win against older generation AIs* >> >> The discovery of transformer Technology in 2017 was enormously important, >> but it would be silly to say that is the only technique that an AI is >> allowed to use. >> >>> *>you want to convince me that ChatGPT is the answer to everything.* >> >> Don't be ridiculous! >> >>> >* **Ok, maybe you are right and I am crazy.* >> >> Yeah maybe. >> >> John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis >> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> >> rxq >> >>> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0Ko%2BMPKt-T2gsnOMXeTJZFRr%3DuB2-gsHGB%3D%2BTEHaW%3DaA%40mail.gmail.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0Ko%2BMPKt-T2gsnOMXeTJZFRr%3DuB2-gsHGB%3D%2BTEHaW%3DaA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUhxEegTiFhpunMPN-UL38JJ7G0%3D6VuMZcO1o_Ohg3ORig%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUhxEegTiFhpunMPN-UL38JJ7G0%3D6VuMZcO1o_Ohg3ORig%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/3422d32c-0511-4b3d-9aa8-3fe7d870b4d9%40app.fastmail.com.
