I doubt this. I've done AI annotation work on the big models. Part of my job was comparing two model outputs and rating which is better, and using detailed criteria to explain why it's better. The HF part.

That's a lot of expensive work they're doing, and ignoring, if they're just later poisoning the models!

▲

h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 8 days ago | parent [-]

GP kind of implying that AGI is already there, and all companies are just dumbing them down because of regulations of the law.

I'm like "Sure buddy, sure. And the nanobots are in all vaccines, right?"

▲

oceanplexian 4 days ago | parent [-]

If your company built a super intelligent LLM, say that could find Alpha in the financial markets, would you make it public to anyone with a ChatGPT subscription?

Of course not! They would use it to trade and would keep it concealed while throwing the public a bone with a less advanced version. Same thing applies as AGI or even as code gen gets better.

	▲	h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		How often did you see an actual UFO? How likely is it that you saw a plane made by humans that you misclassified due to lack of data vs how likely is it that it was actually an Alien made aircraft, coincidentally working in our atmospheric conditions, gravity and drag related physics? Guess what, it's about likeliness and you are extrapolating the wrong assumptions. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not the other way around.