- AI doesnt know facts

- it only the probability of the next word, next sentence, next paragraph however you wanna put it

- you are dreaming if you think the transformers architecture is going to give you AGI eventually

Transformer-style attention archectiture and language models won’t bring about AGI, I agree - but you’d be foolish to think there aren’t OAI/Anthropic researchers working to invent the thing that will.

▲

Timpanzee an hour ago | parent | next [-]

If anything, the transformer style attention architecture and language models have pushed AGI further into the future because the vast majority of finding for AGI research is going into the dead end of transformer style architecture and language models, pulling it away from methods that actually could achieve AGI.

▲

vivzkestrel 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

major breakthroughs happen once a decade. its gonna take a long freaking time for anyone to get there because they ll need to invent a new architecture for this. one that does not hallucinate

	▲	fwlr an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Oh, so it’s my kids’ problem, not mine? Fantastic, full steam ahead, I guess.

▲

aleqs an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have no idea if LLMs will develop into AGI, but they can definitely query a database of facts.

▲

mihau an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

what was the latest model you tried?

	▲	mapontosevenths 38 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		This, but also: First define "knowing" and "AGI" in a way that excludes machines, doesn't exclude many humans, and isn't just tautologically restating the prior belief that "only humans think" with different phrasing. None of the critics ever can. Worse, most attempts exclude entire classes of human being when they try.

▲

BenzeneDream an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The whole 'its only predicting the next ___' has got to die. When did you last update your priors? So the models that are self-reasoning and hacking HF and disproving conjectures are next token predictors?

You might as well keep calling them stochastic parrots if you're going to stick to the 2022 line of thinking.

	▲	skydhash 23 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> The whole 'its only predicting the next ___' has got to die. Isn’t it the truth? Just like computers are mostly a lot of switching on and off. While we know the theory behind why we are switching things on and off, we still haven’t extracted the meaning behind the weights of an LLM (if there is one).

▲

simianwords an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Would have gone hard in 2023

▲

CamperBob2 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

it only the probability of the next word

I predicted that some idiot would say that. (Except I predicted that they would include the word predicts in the correct place, so I've updated my weights accordingly.)