economics reporter learns "surprising facts" from no data

3 years ago by froztbyte to c/techtakes

Maybe we have some time before AIs conquer the world

starting out[0] with "I was surprised by the following results" and it just goes further down almost-but-not-quite Getting It Avenue

close, but certainly no cigar

choice quotes:

Why is it impressive that a model trained on internet text full of random facts happens to have a lot of random facts memorized? … why does that in any way indicate intelligence or creativity?

That’s a good point.

you don't fucking say

I have a website (TrackingAI.org) that already administers a political survey to AIs every day. So I could easily give the AIs a real intelligence test, and track that over time, too.

really, how?

As I started manually giving AIs IQ tests

oh.

Then it proceeds to mis-identify every single one of the 6 answer options, leading it to pick the wrong answer. There seems to be little rhyme or reason to its misidentifications

if this fuckwit had even the slightest fucking understanding of how these things work, it would be glaringly obvious

there's plenty more, so remember to practice stretching before you start your eyerolls

gnomicutterance 21 points 3 years ago
path: 0 8106623, hotness: undefined, score: 21, children: 1
gnomicutterance 13 points 3 years ago
path: 0 8106623 8106640, hotness: undefined, score: 13, children: 0
mozz 15 points 3 years ago

I miss the days when GPT would make an explicit point within a decent fraction of its answers that it was only a large language model, and not a general purpose intelligence, because those are two very very different (if very similar-seeming to initial human perception) things.

It seems that the inexorable tide of misperception that that was a futile attempt to forestall has come in.

path: 0 8106966, hotness: undefined, score: 15, children: 2
froztbyte 11 points 3 years ago

that probably got "strategically removed" for uhhhhhhh checks notes financial reasons

(read: almost certainly some execs made the call to get that nuked, because it didn't fit the narrative they're tried to sell)

path: 0 8106966 8107246, hotness: undefined, score: 11, children: 0
200fifty 10 points 3 years ago

I feel like it was all over from the moment they made it talk in first person. No one had any illusions that Inferkit or NovelAI were general intelligences, because it was obvious that they were just language models autocompleting a sentence you typed in.

path: 0 8106966 8107572, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 0
swlabr 14 points 3 years ago

On their substack the author claims they are “doing non-ideological […] reporting”, which means they are definitely doing ideological reporting. Let’s see…

next most recent post titled “the dawn of woke ai” says pretty much what you’ll guess it does from the title. It also features the AI rendered POC nazis from a bit back as evidence of “woke”ness… Fun!

path: 0 8107844, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 3
Evinceo 15 points 3 years ago
  • SubStack
  • "Maximum Truth"

can I discard someone's opinion twice?

path: 0 8107844 8107974, hotness: undefined, score: 15, children: 1
Soyweiser 10 points 3 years ago

"The Dawn of Woke AI"

Can I do it thrice?

path: 0 8107844 8107974 8113024, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 0
froztbyte 9 points 3 years ago

I didn't even go exploring. on the one hand I feel this is good (in the sense that it didn't depress me even more), on the other it would've made the who clear earlier

path: 0 8107844 8107920, hotness: undefined, score: 9, children: 0
Amoeba_Girl 13 points 3 years ago

Another way of putting it: Out of 196 questions, ChatGPT-4 got about 5 more correct answers than a random guesser would (39 vs 34.23.)

What are the odds of that?

I'm too lazy to look through the tests he's administering, but IQ tests like the WAIS have vocabulary questions, which yes you would expect an LLM to be better at than random chance.

I've surely said it before but when you see the sort of thinking on display by Mr Max Truth here, is it any wonder why rationalists are impressed with ChatGPT's reasoning faculties.

path: 0 8110693, hotness: undefined, score: 13, children: 3
Amoeba_Girl 16 points 3 years ago

I asked ChatGPT-4 if cars in roundabouts in Ireland go clockwise or counterclockwise. It got it wrong. When I told it that, it apologized and gave the right answer. But then I trickily called it out on its right answer, and it apologized again and reverted to the wrong answer. Fundamentally, it knows that the Irish drive on the left side of the road, but it doesn’t understand how to apply that to a roundabout to find the circular direction.

lol you fucking idiot

path: 0 8110693 8110820, hotness: undefined, score: 16, children: 2
self 14 points 3 years ago

this coin I’m flipping fundamentally knows everything about how the Irish drive, but it only seems to feel like giving me the right answer approximately half the time

this reminds me of very early in my programming career, when I discovered that an NPC I programmed to randomly either move forward or turn left every 10 seconds was surprisingly good at solving simple labyrinths. I used to instantiate like 100 of them and see which ones would win (or “fight” by colliding with each other, or escape the labyrinth by stacking on top of other instances). you’re telling me now I was a handful of incredibly stupid blog posts away from being a renowned AI researcher?

path: 0 8110693 8110820 8111107, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 1
swlabr 12 points 3 years ago

I used to instantiate like 100 of them and see which ones would win (or “fight” by colliding with each other

The basilisk will not take kindly to your desecration of AGI for sport.

path: 0 8110693 8110820 8111107 8124078, hotness: undefined, score: 12, children: 0
froztbyte 13 points 3 years ago

and of course the domain is fucking maximum truth dot org

path: 0 8106338, hotness: undefined, score: 13, children: 2
froztbyte 10 points 3 years ago

(idly: I didn't immediately notice whether this is one of the quantified clueless, so not sure if it should be on sneerclub instead. but that domain set me wondering basically immediately)

path: 0 8106338 8106371, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 1
froztbyte 7 points 3 years ago

oh, they're mentioned at the bottom, so it is indeed that crowd

path: 0 8106338 8106371 8106585, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 0
gnomicutterance 11 points 3 years ago
path: 0 8106837, hotness: undefined, score: 11, children: 1
gnomicutterance 14 points 3 years ago
path: 0 8106837 8106863, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 0
jonhendry 9 points 3 years ago

“On my Substack I am doing non-ideological, data-driven reporting!”

I don’t believe the son of pro-gun propagandist John Lott is capable of doing non-ideological reporting.

path: 0 8111934, hotness: undefined, score: 9, children: 0
techtakes
techtakes

@awful.systems

login for more options
2728
1530
1764

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

go to feed...