skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> What happens when ALL of our decisions can be assigned an accuracy score?

Then humans become trainable machines. Not just prone to indoctrination and/or manipulation by finesse, but actually trained to a specification. It is imperative that us individuals continue to retain control through the transition.
Honest question: why would you bother expecting it to solve puzzles? It's not a use case for GPT.
We will also continue moving towards a bad place if we just let Russia do what it wants in Ukraine (and beyond). It will cost the West one way or the other.
In addition to very open publishing, Google recently released Flan-UL2 open source which is an order of magnitude more impressive than anything OpenAI has ever open sourced.

I agree, it is a bizarre world where the "organization that launched as a not for profit called OpenAI" is considerably less open than Google.
That "expansion of the war" would be very ugly in multiple ways so both sides trying very hard to avoid it is good.

That this was an unmanned drone also means it's downing is overall less serious.
I don't think it is a bailout. Doesn't the company have to survive to be a bailout?
If we had a large dataset of experts interrogating AI/people and noting answers that raised suspicion, we'd have AI passing the Turing test more often than actual people very quickly.
I think we are past the "just predicting the next token" stage. GPT and it's various incarnations do exhibit behaviour that most people will describe as thinking
I sincerely hope you wrong.
We don't support sockets out-of-the-box yet, but we have built a solution for the "networking-from-the-browser" problem a few months ago and we may backport that to Cheerp eventually.

https://leaningtech.com/webvm-virtual-machine-with-networkin...
Congratulations, looks like a great release! I'm a big fan of CheerpJ - these tools are making web development from other languages a reality.
Next token prediction is remarkably bad at mnemonic generation, even in English. Add another, lower-resourced language, and it will be really bad. For what it's worth 'cola' does rhyme with 'hola' and 'you know' rhymes with 'uno', but none of the other combos are even rhymes.
last i checked a calculator is better at math than all humans ever
There's a large leap in logic in your premise. I find it far more likely that standardized tests are just a poor measurement of general intelligence.
Haven't we beat this dead horse enough? Looking forward to using GPT to hide recurring threads like this in the future...
How close are we to handing this thing a desktop and an internet connection with the prompt "ok now make gpt-5"?

In fact, the models appear to be already kind of doing that? With the fuzzy layer of the humans still in the loop.
There's a sample of GPT-4 acting as a "Socratic tutor" teaching a student how to solve a high school math problem. If that sample is representative, it means GPT-4 has a theory of other people's minds. Or it is so good at emulating one that it doesn't matter?

I'm not sure where the "stochastic parrot" argument goes now.
What would you prefer? An armed strike over the loss of a remote controlled plane?

Wait until you learn about Gary Powers’s “civilian” U-2, or the USS Pueblo, or the USS Liberty, or Korean Airlines 007 and Congressman Larry McDonald.
Currently revising for master exams. Conversations with ChatGPT have been a game changer for enhancing my learning.
It's very worth doing in this context ... almost all of the assembly I've written in the last ten years has been on routines like this. Compilers are very smart, but it's hard for them to optimize concurrent and interleaved cryptographic algorithms to be cache pipeline efficient and operation efficient at the same time.

AES-GCM is "AES" and "GCM" running at the same time on the same data. ChaCha20 is "ChaCha20" and "Poly1305" running at the same time on the same data, usually block by block so that you avoid pulling data into cache more than once. You can interleave their imperative operations in C, or Rust code (or whatever) ... but the compiler isn't going to intuit how some of the math can be re-used across the algorithms without a lot of hints, or how it can be safely vectorized, and at that point you might as well just write the assembly.
Personally, sites like that increase my confidence a bit for those sorts of businesses.

If a company spends a lot on a fancy, flashy site, the implication (for me) is that they're more about marketing and image than they are about whatever their business is. If their business is retail, that's OK. I get it. If their business is handling my money, though, it raises a tiny bit of doubt in my mind about their priorities.
You think that it’s being fed questions that it has a lookup table for? Have you used these models? They can answer arbitrary new questions. This newest model was tested against tests it hasn’t seen before. You understand that that isn’t a lookup problem, right?
Does anyone know if we're near the theoretical limit of how much we can improve these models by giving them more data? Or should we expect similar levels of improvements in next iterations?
Replace "AI" with "powerful institutions" and you hit it on the head. Maybe "AI" should stand for "augmented institutions".

Maybe you'd be interested in Paulo Freire's book "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed"?
They claim GPT4 is > 80% less trickable in that regard
Coincidentally, I am in a class being conducted by John C. Hull right now as I type this comment.
I was joking, but even if the US shot down a couple Russian planes, it doubt it would lead to any more direct US involvement. The US isn't interested, and the Russians definitely don't want any part of that.
> Image inputs are still a research preview and not publicly available.

Will input-images also be tokenized? Multi-modal input is an area of research, but an image could be converted into a text description (?) before being inserted into the input stream.
I'd love to get to a point where I can go: Add a cast button to this open source android video app.

I see some FOSS-boosting silver linings in all of this.
> What happens when ALL of our decisions can be assigned an accuracy score?

That is exactly the opposite of what we are seeing here. We can check the accuracy of GPT-X's responses. They cannot check the accuracy of our decisions. Or even their own work.

So the implications are not as deep as people think - everything that comes out of these systems needs checked before it can be used or trusted.
> Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar.

Thanks OpenAI
Ah, I had missed that interpretation. Although, that may explain why GPT-4 got it wrong: there's so much context in its training data about the relationship between lions and humans, and this puzzle specifically, that like this human its response was swayed...
How do you know silicon chips don't have an internal experience already? Are you in that "consciousness is magically emergent" camp?
.mil is the US military's TLD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.mil. EU COM is the US European Command. It is about as primary a source as you can get.
Anyone know of a scrcpy for windows/mac/Linux? If not, why has there not been a “wired” screen mirroring tool for desktop os? Is it just more difficult than doing it for android?
It will have to payout of its blockchain wallet that naturally it will have. /s
Do you mean that an AGI is an AI that can do everything any human can do?

That's a reasonable goal, but it's also not what people were aiming for historically. It's also very expansive: if human level intelligence means outperforming in every field every human that ever lived, that's a high bar to meet. Indeed, it means that no humans have ever achieved human-level intelligence.
Great questions. We want to keep some of our technical details closer to the chest, so I won't go into the specific technologies we're using here.

I will expand a bit on fine-tuning. It's really hard to get this right, and the iteration speed is slow. Of course these companies can build their own, but we want to save them a lot of headache.

So far, we haven't found any off-the-shelf open source base model that works super well for code completions. We've augmented models with a huge amount of data in order to see our current performance, and we ran into a lot of pain along the way.
This might be a regional thing but the only times I’ve ever seen a lift without an indicator has been in glass lifts.
The embodied cognition is still a theory, can consciousness appears in a simulated brain without a physical body? Maybe. What seems to be a limiting factor for now it's that current models don't experience existence, they don't have memory and don't "think" outside of the prompt. They are just instances of code launched and destroyed as soon as their task is done.

Right now it's possible to simulate memory with additional context (eg system prompt) but it doesn’t represent existence experienced by the model. If we want to go deeper the models need to actually learn from their interaction, update their internal networks and have some capabilities of self reflection (ie "talking to themselves").

I'm sure that's highly researched topic but it would demands extraordinary computational power and would cause lot of issues by letting such an AI in the wild.
Why do you believe there is hope of criminal charges? All indications show that banks simply get propped up and the incompetence remains unpunished.
I didn’t even know who Elvis Perkins is.
> measured as career progress

But that's circular. Career progress is not necessarily correlated with actual performance. The latter is really hard to separate from politics. It is possible to have a stellar career while being a mediocre performer if you know how to work the system and have a bit of good luck. Likewise, it's possible to be an outstanding performer and have a mediocre or even non-existent career if you don't happen to be in the right place at the right time, or if you rub the wrong person the wrong way.
Unless you are working in a functional language and don't have loops.
What I don't understand is how GPT-4 is able to do reasonably well on tests like the AMC12: Many of the AMC12 questions require a number of logical/deductive steps. If GPT-4 is simply trained on a large corpus of text, how is it able to do this? Does this imply that there is some emergent deductive ability that you get simply by learning "language?" Or am I missing something?

Obviously, I'm assuming that GPT-4 wasn't trained on the exams that it was tested against.
More commonly known as “ The Unabomber Manifesto”[1]

> 1995 anti-technology essay by Ted Kaczynski… contends that the Industrial Revolution began a harmful process of natural destruction brought about by technology, while forcing humans to adapt to machinery, creating a sociopolitical order that suppresses human freedom and potential.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber_Manifesto
When do we hit the bend in the S-curve?

What's the fundamental limit where it becomes much more difficult to improve these systems without some new break through?
This whole notion of people suggesting the size of a binary or its memory footprint inherently makes it unappealing or inefficient is just plain wrong. But what's disgusting is lambasting an app without _any_ evidence whatsoever other than some completely useless and arbitrary metric. I see that conversation as wholly unfounded and just plain repulsive.

If you want to criticize someone's hard work, at least bring some supporting evidence.

This whole "my terminal app uses 250 kilobytes of disk space" means absolutely nothing and is just plain rude. By that logic, gedit is a full fledged development environment.
Also error handling
It's SOTA on DocVQA[1] so yeah it is able to read text/graphs/tables from images

[1] https://www.docvqa.org/
It does kind of sound the same tho? Grassy-ass. Grassiyass. Grassyaas. Gracias.
Whether or not the MQ-9 was armed is so far down the list of logical arguments about why a Russian pilot would go kamikaze on and collide with an unmanned aircraft, it's not even a sensible question to ask.

A better question to ask is what would provoke a Russian pilot to act so recklessly? Here are three ideas:

1) Lack of pilot training
2) Command has no authority
3) Command is incompetent
Teachers for younger grades are very important. Human to human interaction is crucial to a developing child's mind, and teachers of those grades are specifically trained for it.

I think we often view teaching as knowledge-in-knowledge-out, which is true for later grades. For early ones though, many teach how to be "human" as crazy as it sounds.

A great example would be handing a double sided worksheet to a child in 1st grade. A normal person may just hand the child the paper and pencil and tell them to go work on it. A teacher will teach the child where and how to write their name, to read instructions carefully, and to flip the paper over to check for more questions.

We often don't think about things like that, since we don't remember them at all.

I can imagine a future where AIs greatly enhance the paperwork, planning, etc. of teachers so that they can wholly focus on human to human interaction.

There's much more I'm missing here that teachers of younger grades do, but I hope my point has gotten across.
Layoffs are not something any employees can control. It's gonna happen or it's not. That's it. Without proper collective power, the only thing we can do is worry.

You're right in that language doesn't matter. Hell even the delivery of the message doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the severance or layoff package. That's the real meat. There should be a mandatory law that publishes all layoff packages so that everyone can see if they're getting a fair deal or not.
Not a fair comparison, Newsom has a substantial portion of his money directly tied to the fate of this bank. If this were a legal case a judge would have to recuse himself.
> that's not why the bank was shuttered. It was shuttered for the same reason SVB and Silvergate were closed

Silvergate was significantly impaired by the crypto blow-ups [1]. That forced them to sell their short-duration, liquid holdings. It also started their stock-price slide [2]. The combination put them in a uniquely vulnerable and continuously degrading position. Signature wasn't as badly hit by the blow-up, but its stock started sliding with Silvergate. Perceptions matter, and when Silvergate folded, non-crypto depositors began pulling money from Signature.

Had Signature not banked crypto, or been publicly affiliated with it, they would have likely survived.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-03-09/silver...

[2] https://www.barrons.com/articles/crypto-silvergate-signature...
If you’re looking for proof you’re begging the question, asking for a formal proof of something that by definition can’t be proven, which only makes sense if your philosophical basis is that reality is a formal system. Other people have other philosophical bases, and while they may not be formally probable, they can be supported with other evidence that is equally strong, pointing to the non determinism of quantum physics or the infinitely recursive question of “what caused the first cause”.

The strongest evidence I have is that people are notoriously difficult to predict, individually.
Mighty Russian 80s aircraft heroically damaged a US unmanned, pretty much disposable drone. Didn't have the balls, or ammo, to shoot at it, mind you, just flew very close.

I suppose for lack of actual military success in Ukraine, this makes for some headline.
Wow. I specifically remember "AIs will never be able to explain visual humor" as a confident prediction from the before times of 2020.
>is a whole different ball game.

I was thinking the same: can a (future) model be like Leonardo or Beethoven, and actually innovate?

Assuming that what Beethoven did is not "just" making music similar to pre-existing music.

And yes, I'm aware the bar was raised from "average human" to Beethoven.
How does this compare to rclone, performance wise?

https://rclone.org
First. connect them to empirical feedback devices. In other words, make them scientists.

Human life on Earth is not that hard (think of it as a video game.) Because of evolution, the world seems like it was designed to automatically make a beautiful paradise for us. Literally, all you have to do to improve a place is leave it alone in the sun with a little bit of water. Life is exponential self-improving nano-technology.

The only reason we have problems is because we are stupid, foolish, and ignorant. The computers are not, and, if we listen to them, they will tell us how to solve all our problems and live happily ever after.
>the explain your answer is something I'm really interested in to help me understand the sentences I'm constructing

They used to have an army of native-speaking volunteers to do this for free in the comments. I guess this is why they turned those off.
Let's check out the paper for actual tech details!

> Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar.

- OpenAI
I mean even I disagree with a lot of what Meta is doing, but you have to admit that there is viability there especially if the tech in those "bricks" can be shrunk to the size of regular glass
Given the amount of dead Russians on Ukrainian soil with nato weapons and ammo in them, I don't think the US is being humiliated here.

I do suspect the US will retaliate in some small way though. Likely stop and board a few Russian vessels in international waters or something equally silly.
So "A Player" is on a pointless project not providing value to the company gets axed. The value to the company is losing with that "A Player" is nothing because the project they're working on is pointless.

These companies could take a more twitter like "print out your code" or global stack ranking to lay people off but i don't think it dodge the problem people describe. The "A Player" could still be mad that all their coworkers got fired and/or the "pointless project" they enjoyed working on got axed and still leave. You just get the add cost, drama, and blow-back (see twitter) that a performance based firing would entail and probably open yourself up to lawsuits (IANAL) if you don't have an adequate paper trail for those performance based filings.
For #1, yeah I do. If I'm working on more routine/boilerplatey parts I might go a little longer without running, but it's pretty important to me to verify that each bit is working as expected before moving on. It's easy to wind up in a mess if I'm operating on the assumption that what's been written so far all works.

For #2, yeah that's true, but for me less visible improvements are gratifying, because not only is the thing being rewritten being improved, but I can also apply learnings to other projects that make rewriting them less necessary. Also, it just bugs me when there's reasonable obtainable improvements in optimization, flexibility, etc that I've left on the table… feels like I left the job half-done which isn't a great feeling.
can't you combine instances of 4k tokens in 3.5 to fake it? having one gpt context per code file, for instance and maybe some sort of index?

I'm not super versed on lang chain but that might be kinda what that solves...
It's not about missing out but you get sucked in and there's no end. I don't use TikTok myself but I've gotten stuck with YouTube Shorts where 45 min easily fly by despite me disliking it. On all other social media platforms you reach the end and see content you read yesterday. On these video platforms it just goes on and on. Short videos are also a very digestable format.
“ Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar.” - HUGE step backwards.
> It's not clear to me if the lesson here is that GPT's reasoning capabilities are being masked by an incorrect prior (having memorized the standard version of this puzzle) or if the lesson is that GPT'S reasoning capabilities are always a bit of smoke and mirrors that passes off memorization for logic.

It's a lot closer to the latter. GPT doesn't have "reasoning capabilities", any more than any other computer program. It doesn't have a clue what any of its input means, nor the meaning of the text it outputs. It just blindly spits out the words most probable to follow the prompt, based on its corpus of training data and the weights/biases added to fine tune it. It can often do a good job at mimicking reasoning, but it's not.
> Trained only on permissively-licensed repos to avoid legal risks

Do any of those “permissive” licences require attribution? Do they all grant a patent license?
Love that weird inclusion of "a democrat" in there. It's irrelevant and I have no idea why they thought that was an important factoid, but the oddity of it made me laugh.
That source code isn’t worth much without the underlying domain knowledge, large parts of which only exist in the employees’ heads, more often than not. Maybe if the code is really, really well documented. ;)

Companies could in principle train an in-house AI with their corporate knowledge, and will likely be tempted to do so in the future. But that also creates a big risk, because whoever manages to get their hand on a copy of that model (a single file) will instantly have unrestrained access to that valuable knowledge. It will be interesting to see what mechanisms are found to mitigate that risk.
it feels weird not grabbing this directly from the openssl team. that's a gap in trust...
The bank was not bailed out. The depositors were.

Investors may lose almost everything. The management is sacked. The bank is dead, not bailed out.
Yeah...this is where the talk of "guardrails" sometimes gets, forgive the pun, derailed. There are good reasons to be able to put some guardrails in place on your AI model other than pure censorship. I'd really like the page I am having my AI summarize not to be able to hijack it and turn it against me.
>That said, GPT has no model of the world.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Here is an example where researchers trained a transformer to generate legal sequences of moves in the board game Othello. Then they demonstrated that the internal state of the model did, in fact, have a representation of the board.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.13382
How do you know the model isn’t internally reasoning about the problem? It’s a 175B+ parameter model. If, during training, some collection of weights exist along the gradient that approximate cognition, then it’s highly likely the optimizer would select those weights over more specialized memorization weights.

It’s also possible, likely even, that the model is capable of both memorization and cognition, and in this case the “memorization neurons” are driving the prediction.
LLM outputs in Standard Chinese are fluent and coherent but the grammar style and choice of words are clearly non-native. I think the source training material just isn't as comprehensive as English, and contemporary Chinese Internet is packed full of latin abbreviations and obscure homophones/wordplay due to its evolution under severe censorship.
Feel free to read my other comment, but by toxic I mean criticizing without any evidence whatsoever other than some preconceived notions about disk usage.