Support NeoGAF

[Kamina]

The whole trend around AI just reflects peoples stupidity.
Those examples of shitty ai slob shows skill-less and lazy people cant even create anything even if they only have to proofread and do quality control.
Meanwhile managers force workers to go all AI like it's the second coming.
It feels like being forced to comply abandon writing by hand in favor of a pc+keyboard for just about anything.

 

[rm082e]

The comments on this video are absolutely golden.
When this AI bubble bursts, it's going to be the taxpayer picking up the tab. Again.
And all the villains will get away with the money. Again.

Privatize the profits and publicly divest the risks. The executive management class will take their golden parachutes and retire, while the worker class gets laid off in huge waves.

 

[IlGialloMondadori]

Maybe Gaussian then?

But in other ways it can do amazing things, that even the Einsteins of this world can't. Like you can propose a new idea or technology or software or rendering technique to the AI that is purely theoretical and have it play devils advocate point out all the potential pitfalls or advantages and have a full on argument about its assertions inferred from billions of pieces of information and genuinely leapfrog all sorts of prototype pitfalls before committing to the project in any way.

So maybe you have good results with this, but my opinion is anything like this AI is just shitting out garbage and it's worthless. It doesn't know anything about what you're talking about. It may seem useful, but it's not. It's /r/llmphysics in a nutshell. Proposing radical ideas and the ai is just bullshitting you into thinking you're onto something. Or not onto something.

 

[PaintTinJr]

So maybe you have good results with this, but my opinion is anything like this AI is just shitting out garbage and it's worthless. It doesn't know anything about what you're talking about. It may seem useful, but it's not. It's /r/llmphysics in a nutshell. Proposing radical ideas and the ai is just bullshitting you into thinking you're onto something. Or not onto something.

In my first post I made the point that it requires the user to hold the LLM to account at every stage - and I agree without doing that it will generate what you are calling garbage typical garbage in, garbage out - because what I feel the AI is really doing is mirroring the user, and the user's ability to understand things - rather than provide any intelligence itself - and so provided the user understands what they are doing and just using it like an understanding accelerator of the world's knowledge to apply to their problem it is exceptionally useful.

As for the "AI is just bullshitting you" limphysics, it isn't, it is the user failing to hold it to account with its own knowledge and force it to truly prove what it is saying is based in sound facts/theories - to the user.

My experience with it, is that it typically downplays any ideas even misaligning limitations and lets the user drive the conversation in which it can asymmetrically mirror its response quoting and asserting from its assimilation of all the research a 700b model can get.

A conversation like: Could a GPU with only FP16 acceleration build a ML model to infer dual INT 8 outputs faster/less cycles than just using intrinsic and two FP16 calculations to do the INT8 calculations as FP16? Really shows that it can present all the reasoning why it is very unlikely to work, while being very educational for anyone actually prepared to try it for a specific use case.

I don't consider that type of informative interaction garbage.

 

[tr1p1ex]

It's all a gold rush. And execs of all these companies have to do something AI because everyone else is. IF you don't do something AI as an exec it could be held against you and your employment. IF you do AI, even if you think it's a croc at this point, and something goes wrong, it's the fault of AI not you.

Also you're ostracized at cocktail parties with execs from other companies if you aren't doing anything AI.

 

[tr1p1ex]

Maybe Gaussian then?

But in other ways it can do amazing things, that even the Einsteins of this world can't. Like you can propose a new idea or technology or software or rendering technique to the AI that is purely theoretical and have it play devils advocate point out all the potential pitfalls or advantages and have a full on argument about its assertions inferred from billions of pieces of information and genuinely leapfrog all sorts of prototype pitfalls before committing to the project in any way.

It's retarded. It can't do any of that. And thats an overstatement. IT's actually less than retarded. IT's just a computer pattern matching and brute forcing as usual except on a more massive scale.