On 3/20/2023 4:00 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:

Meanwhile, back in reality:

(1) Do you understand the importance of testing machine learning algorithms in out-of-corpus data? Do you understand the difference between generalization and overfitting? This is the bread and butter of machine learning. This is how ChatGPT was built. You are SUPER EXCITED abou ChatGPT but you do not give a shit about the fundamentals of machine learning? You think they no longer apply, while at the same time cheerleading for its achievements? It's truly bizarre. I approached this topic but you refuse to engage. I actually do peer-review of ML papers and there is no way I (or anyone I work with) would take in-corpus tests seriously. They often look absurdly good. Will you take my trading algorithm offer?

(2) Human beings can form coherent memories and are capable of long-term goals, strategy and slow thinking -- the Turing complete kind. 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 amongst many other things, so it can easily defeat naive players with chess recipes. It is capable of navigating a min-max tree? Of course not, because it lacks recurrence. It cannot possibly win against older generation AIs that do navigate min-max trees and do defeat grand masters. So how do we combine the two types of AI?

This seems like a crucial task for making really usable AI consultants.  You expect an AI be good at the things computers are good at and there are plenty of computer modules to do mathematical inference and Bayesian reasoning.


It looks like you don't care about any of this, instead you want to convince me that ChatGPT is the answer to everything. Ok, maybe you are right and I am crazy.


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 

Reply via email to