| ▲ | exfalso 9 hours ago |
| Come on, the trivializations start to sound quite unfounded now. Yes, a human was needed, but no, it wasn't a "collaboration" |
|
| ▲ | jtmarl1n 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| So the LLM would have done all of this on its own? Why is it ok to acknowledge the human was needed but it’s not a collaboration? Is there a defined percentage of ownership required to make the word collaboration valid? |
| |
| ▲ | true_religion 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | We focus on the tool because that is what makes it novel. Hearing a guy built his home in a week with the power of nails and a hammer would have been novel in era of mortise and tenon. I actually found an article about raving about how fast nail production was thanks to machining advances in 1790 and that it would bring great value: https://digital.libraries.psu.edu/digital/collection/pabookn... It’s seems to me humans haven’t changed, just which machines we praise. | |
| ▲ | jstanley 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If you get someone to build you a house and they do it on their own, does that not count because they wouldn't have done it if you didn't pay them to do it? Technically you built it yourself and the builder was just a minor collaborator? | | |
| ▲ | cicko 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Correct. I do everything by myself. | | |
| ▲ | jfyi 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | I appreciate the effort that went into the verbose version of the "I made this" meme for an hn audience. |
| |
| ▲ | 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | Macuyiko 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | From the article: "However, the most astonishing thing about this break is that the GPT–6 Astra did it entirely on its own. Carter Leffer only directed GPT–6 Astra to see if it could break any of the unbroken Enigma messages published on the Crypto Cellar Research web page." I mean... I'm all for collaboration but I think this case is pretty clear, no? | | |
| ▲ | alerighi 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | I mean, the LLM could do it even without all the HUMAN knowledge that was stealed during training about the Enigma machine? We are fooling to me, there is no intelligence in these models, they just apply methods that were invented by humans without any consciousness on what they are doing. | | |
| ▲ | allturtles 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | You could say exactly the same about humans. Ex nihilo nihil fit. Every human depends on a vast corpus of prior human knowledge to be able to accomplish anything. This doesn't mean they have no intelligence. | | |
| ▲ | huty 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is dumb. At the margin the innovative human matters. What that means for the rest of society is TBD. | | |
| ▲ | TeMPOraL 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | At the margin innovation is just taking the obvious next step first. | | |
| ▲ | huty2 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Says the person whose never produced a novel thought in his life! | | |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | radium3d 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Humans are also needed to code in C++ and compile it, then the computer does the rest. Now we just code in english and the computer does the rest. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | UpsideDownRide 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What do you even mean it wasn't a collaboration. At any meaningful level LLMs just plain out suck when left unguided. The shortcomings should really be obvious by now to anyone honest. And the marketing distortion being oushed out is just tiresome and detrimental for all of us. |
|
| ▲ | speed_spread 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| A cyclist pedaling up a mountain isn't a "collaboration" between a bicycle and a human. This is the same. You don't see feral bicycles roaming the land. All models are ultimately built and run by humans, with human-provided instructions. And as with any program, it's garbage in, garbage out. |
| |
| ▲ | TeMPOraL 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | More apt analogy here: a cyclist pushing a bicycle down the mountain and seeing it somehow get down the whole track without falling down, is not a collaboration between a bicycle and a human. The human was not involved beyond giving the initial push. | | |
| ▲ | speed_spread 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Cyclist still chooses the time, mountain and direction the bicycle gets pushed in. Bicycles have no agency and only go down because gravity. Bicycle will not "discover" tree or wall, any outcome solely the result of cyclist's decisions even if thrown bicycles don't have generally deterministic paths. Don't anthropomorphize the bicycle. |
| |
| ▲ | 1attice 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The bicycle -- a simple method of transport powered entirely by humans -- used analogically to prove a point about [clears throat] automation. I think this sounds somewhat less silly in English because "automotive" and "automative" don't have the same hyper-visible affinity, but all the same; you may want to consider the car as a more viable analogand. |
|
