when you say " don't learn or take account of the past "
is that true ?
they are feed the past during training .

Do you understand how it picks the next word from a query? It understands nothing, it just uses vast computer power to select the next word a human once used in a similar instance from that training using statistics. One of the side-effects feeding back LLM products back into the process is it quickly degrades the statistical basis and starts to hallucinate even more than normal.

https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/chatgpt.191318/post-1829927

Using AI-generated data to train AI could introduce further errors into already error-prone models. Large language models regularly present false information as fact. If they generate incorrect output that is itself used to train other AI models, the errors can be absorbed by those models and amplified over time, making it more and more difficult to work out their origins, says Ilia Shumailov, a junior research fellow in computer science at Oxford University, who was not involved in the project.


Even worse, there’s no simple fix. “The problem is, when you’re using artificial data, you acquire the errors from the misunderstandings of the models and statistical errors,” he says. “You need to make sure that your errors are not biasing the output of other models, and there’s no simple way to do that.”

 

Do you understand how it picks the next word from a query? It understands nothing, it just uses vast computer power to select the next word a human once used in a similar instance from that training using statistics. One of the side-effects feeding back LLM products back into the process is it quickly degrades the statistical basis and starts to hallucinate even more than normal.

https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/chatgpt.191318/post-1829927

Using AI-generated data to train AI could introduce further errors into already error-prone models. Large language models regularly present false information as fact. If they generate incorrect output that is itself used to train other AI models, the errors can be absorbed by those models and amplified over time, making it more and more difficult to work out their origins, says Ilia Shumailov, a junior research fellow in computer science at Oxford University, who was not involved in the project.


Even worse, there’s no simple fix. “The problem is, when you’re using artificial data, you acquire the errors from the misunderstandings of the models and statistical errors,” he says. “You need to make sure that your errors are not biasing the output of other models, and there’s no simple way to do that.”

You say "Do you understand how it picks the next word from a query"
sure, or at least thats part of how programs like Eliza worked
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

but the simple example I gave was the pope wearing a coat picture,
no text involved there .

 

You say "Do you understand how it picks the next word from a query"
sure, or at least thats part of how programs like Eliza worked
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

but the simple example I gave was the pope wearing a coat picture,
no text involved there .

The LLM uses a completely different methodology but it's much the same level of hype.
https://www.return.life/p/please-stop-talking-about-the-eliza-chatbot

ELIZA is the cautionary tale about how “AI” is all smoke and mirrors. It’s the go-to parable for any commentator on AI who wants to stand apart as that lone voice crying in the wilderness, warning the mob of its error. ELIZA is AI’s tulip mania — i.e., it’s the story you invoke amidst all the excitement to demonstrate that you know you some history, and as a history knower, it grieves you to watch the non-history-knowers in the mob rush headlong to repeat the history that, again, you know and they do not.

Yes, ELIZA is definitely a part of the history of AI, but the problem is that this ancient chatbot represents an evolutionary dead end that just isn’t very relevant to what is actually happening with machine learning since about 2017.
...
Not only are large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT fundamentally different from older NLP programs by virtue of the latter’s stochasticity, but at this point in history, they’re built on multiple fundamental innovations that separate them from the primitive neural nets that were being investigated at the time ELIZA was built. We’ve had backpropagation, deep learning, and transformers each shake up the field and drive significant advances in our ability to make this peculiar class of software perform feats that are so magical we often find it impossible to produce a satisfactory explanation of how they did it.

But as much sense as our tendency to see intentionality everywhere might make, it’s not obviously related to the question of what LLMs are and are not doing, and how we should and should not think of this technology. And by similar logic, your ELIZA story is old and no longer relevant, gramps. You can quietly retire it.

From your link:

Lay responses to ELIZA were disturbing to Weizenbaum and motivated him to write his book Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation, in which he explains the limits of computers, as he wants to make clear his opinion that the anthropomorphic views of computers are just a reduction of human beings or any life form for that matter.[29] In the independent documentary film Plug & Pray (2010) Weizenbaum said that only people who misunderstood ELIZA called it a sensation.[30]

We have exactly the same situation with ChatGPT, only people who misunderstood "" called it a sensation.

It's all groups of bits to the computer, text, graphics, sound make zero difference to the LLM.

 

The LLM uses a completely different methodology but it's much the same level of hype.
https://www.return.life/p/please-stop-talking-about-the-eliza-chatbot



From your link:


We have exactly the same situation with ChatGPT, only people who misunderstood "" called it a sensation.

It's all groups of bits to the computer, text, graphics, sound make zero difference to the LLM.

re " It's all groups of bits to the computer "
to the "brain" its just all electrical impulses
the difference is ?

 

re " It's all groups of bits to the computer "
to the "brain" its just all electrical impulses
the difference is ?

What? That simplistic comparison shows a total lack of comprehension of the problems of AI. Learn something about the subject, please.
The brain is a hell of a lot more than electrical impulses. The difference is so vast it's currently incomprehensible. The electrical impulses from a telegraph key can transmit math but we would never think that means the key understands math..

 

What? That simplistic comparison shows a total lack of comprehension of the problems of AI. Learn something about the subject, please.
The brain is a hell of a lot more than electrical impulses. The difference is so vast it's currently incomprehensible. The electrical impulses from a telegraph key can transmit math but we would never think that means the key understands math..

I appreciate your view @nsaspook,

 

Which begs the question, is consciousness and self awareness necessary for intelligence to exist?

The real question to many IMO is whether the brain is the creator of consciousness, or simply a receiver of it?

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chatgp...net-with-spam-its-just-the-beginning-9c86ea25
AI Junk Is Starting to Pollute the Internet

Clarke, like other publishers interviewed by the Journal, said that his magazine rejects all AI-written submissions and that they are easy to identify.

They have “perfect spelling and grammar, but a completely incoherent story,” he said. Often they start with a grand problem—the world is going to end—and then 1,000 words later the problem is somehow wrapped up, without explanation, he said.

“They’re all written in a rather bland and generic way,” said Stevens, of International Living. “They are all grammatically correct. They just feel very formulaic, and they are really useless to us.”

Should the internet increasingly fill with AI-generated content, it might become a problem for the AI companies themselves. That is because their large language models, the software that forms the basis of chatbots such as ChatGPT, train themselves on public data sets. As these data sets become increasingly filled with AI-generated content, researchers worry that the language models will become less useful, a phenomenon known as “model collapse.”

Just as repeatedly scanning and printing the same photo will eventually reduce its detail, model collapse happens when large learning models become less useful as they digest data they have created, said Ilia Shumailov, a research fellow at Oxford University’s Applied and Theoretical Machine Learning Group who recently co-wrote a paper on this phenomenon.

Yes, eating crap makes you sick.

 

The real question to many IMO is whether the brain is the creator of consciousness, or simply a receiver of it?

Philosophers have been debating that one for centuries and still don't agree...

 

All I understand is when the CEO of the biggest AI company goes before Congress to beg them to regulate it's use, it isn't really a good thing.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/...ress-propose-licenses-building-ai-2023-05-16/

 

All I understand is when the CEO of the biggest AI company goes before Congress to beg them to regulate it's use, it isn't really a good thing.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/...ress-propose-licenses-building-ai-2023-05-16/

https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/21/openai_government_regulation/

OpenAI calls for tough regulation of AI while quietly seeking less of it

Oh no, over there, look, the killer robots, OMG here they come – just pay no attention to us shaping the rules

In effect, the likes of OpenAI want government regulation, but want to steer that regulation so that their machine learning technologies do not fall into a category that will attract tougher rules and more red tape. In public, they call for more rules and safeguards for all, while in private they argue for a lighter touch.

Regulation means he wants to restrict the market to one they design. Remember when the rip-off FTX CEO testified before Congress that company wanted regulation?

 

https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/21/openai_government_regulation/

Regulation means he want to restrict the market to one they design. Remember when the rip-off FTX CEO testified before Congress that company wanted regulation?

Sorry, what is FTX ?

 

Sorry, what is FTX ?

Sorry, I just assume that people have some interest in huge stories about billion dollar rip-offs. It must be a boomer thing.

https://www.google.com/search?q=rip-off+FTX+CEO&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

Sorry, I just assume that people have some interest in huge stories about billion dollar rip-offs. It must be a boomer thing.

https://www.google.com/search?q=rip-off+FTX+CEO&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Oh you are so aggressive @nsaspook
Also Im not in US , and dont have any bit coins,
Now you metion it, Yes I remember that , but it was not a big news event here as far as I can remember.
but hay, at my time of life, I can remember what happened 50 years ago better than I can remember what I had for breakfast.

 

Oh you are so aggressive @nsaspook
Also Im not in US , and dont have any bit coins,
Now you metion it, Yes I remember that , but it was not a big news event here as far as I can remember.
but hay, at my time of life, I can remember what happened 50 years ago better than I can remember what I had for breakfast.

You have not seen my aggression. That was a way (that worked) to jog your memory.

OK, the bottom line was, that guy in handcuffs, was before Congress talking about the need for 'regulation' all while running one of the largest frauds in history so don't read too much about Open AI saying much the same about, we good, they bad, before Congress.

 

You have not seen my aggression. That was a way (that worked) to jog your memory.

OK, the bottom line was, that guy in handcuffs, was before Congress talking about the need for 'regulation' all while running one of the largest frauds in history so don't read too much about Open AI saying much the same about, we good, they bad, before Congress.

And hopefully we would never see your aggression on the forums.

 

https://www.semafor.com/article/07/...ays-he-was-tricked-into-selling-stake-for-100

Stability AI is being sued by a co-founder, who claims he was deceived into selling his 15% stake in one of the hottest startups in the sector for $100 to CEO Emad Mostaque, months before the company raised millions at a $1 billion valuation.

Cyrus Hodes accused Mostaque, who is also named in a lawsuit filed in a U.S. federal court on Thursday, of convincing him that Stability AI was worthless and hiding the company’s work on what became the popular image generator, Stable Diffusion.

Hodes, also a co-founder of blockchain AI startup AIGC Chain, said he sold his entire Stability AI stake in 2021 and 2022, after which the business raised $101 million in a seed funding round. More recently, it was seeking to raise money at a $4 billion valuation.

“Mostaque’s purchase of these shares from his co-founder and minority shareholder for a mere $100.00 epitomizes corporate greed at its worst and simply shocks the conscience,” the lawsuit said. “Those transactions should be rescinded and Hodes’s ownership interest in Stability AI restored.”

$100? Ha Ha, he thought the magical beans he traded it for were worth more than just 100 bucks..

 

https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/13/23794224/sag-aftra-actors-strike-ai-image-rights
Actors say Hollywood studios want their AI replicas — for free, forever

During today’s press conference in which Hollywood actors confirmed that they were going on strike, Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, SAG-AFTRA’s chief negotiator, revealed a proposal from Hollywood studios that sounds ripped right out of a Black Mirror episode.
In a statement about the strike, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) said that its proposal included “a groundbreaking AI proposal that protects actors’ digital likenesses for SAG-AFTRA members.”
When asked about the proposal during the press conference, Crabtree-Ireland said that “This ‘groundbreaking’ AI proposal that they gave us yesterday, they proposed that our background performers should be able to be scanned, get one day’s pay, and their companies should own that scan, their image, their likeness and should be able to use it for the rest of eternity on any project they want, with no consent and no compensation. So if you think that’s a groundbreaking proposal, I suggest you think again.”

 

https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/13/23794224/sag-aftra-actors-strike-ai-image-rights
Actors say Hollywood studios want their AI replicas — for free, forever

We begin to see the problem proposed by George O. Smith so many years ago, then rediscovered by Star Trek writers. A "replicator" has the potential to disrupt the economy in such that how people imagine the social system of economics is brought into question in a way that can't be ignored.

Well, can be, in the form of "they came for the extras, but I wasn't an extra so I did nothing..."...

[edited for absolutely horrible writing and improved only marginally]

 

"they came for the dollars, but I wasn't a dollar so I did nothing..."...