Re:In the battle between Microsoft and Google, LLM is the we...
by sfvisser on Monday April 03, 2023 @12:11PM
(#35426339)
Creating new knowledge would be good start yes. Observe a problem, state some conjectures, try falsifying, and come up with good explanations. Repeat this to learn and update knowledge over time. If that process works it is hard to see what else is left.
Re:In the battle between Microsoft and Google, LLM is the we...
by EthanHeilman on Monday April 03, 2023 @01:20PM
(#35427713)
I gave ChatGPT a cryptographic signature scheme I developed and it found a way to forge signatures as my scheme was insecure. I thought ChatGPT was wrong because I didn't read the attack carefully enough and I didn't expect it be able to reason about cryptography that well. I asked a human cryptographer and then pointed out the same flaw but it took them slightly longer.
To me it felt like knowledge creation, but maybe someone had already published a similar scheme and then someone had published a similar attack and ChatGPT was pattern matching on that and adapting it to my setting. That seems very likely because while I was working in RSA, the fix to the attack is very similar to the use of a nonce in Schnorr signatures and for the same reason.
Re:In the battle between Microsoft and Google, LLM is the we...
by sfvisser on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @02:42AM
(#35435942)
This sounds very interesting! If you ever figure out how it came to that conclusion, that would deserve some write up.
Re:In the battle between Microsoft and Google, LLM is the we...
by EthanHeilman on Tuesday April 04, 2023 @09:42AM
(#35439451)
Maybe I will I'll blog about it. You are the second person to ask for a write up.
Re:In the battle between Microsoft and Google, LLM is the we...
by cookingrobot on Monday April 03, 2023 @03:30PM
(#35429944)
Knowledge creation doesn’t seem hard enough. I think an a/b testing service that optimizes based on how users respond is doing science, and knowledge creation.
I feel like compressing knowledge and being able to answer questions about the knowledge, with the ability to explore “what if” differences seems more like it suggests real understanding. And that’s what these LLMs can do.
Re:In the battle between Microsoft and Google, LLM is the we...
by pharmakom on Monday April 03, 2023 @01:28PM
(#35427843)
We thought we knew what AI-complete tasks were because we couldn't yet imagine what a non-AGI that could complete the tasks would look like. Now we have a great counter example to point to.
I feel like we need a new word for this gradient of intelligence. If you described the capabilities of an LLM to AI research in the early 1990s they would describe it as an AGI. I remember AI researchers using the term AI-complete to describe various tasks, by which they meant that any algorithm which could do X would be AI-complete and thus would also able to do all the other tasks that an AGI must be able to do. The ability to hold a conversation and use human language like GPT-4 was often referred to as an AI-complete task.
When do we cross that threshold into AGI? If you have a robot library that can paraphrase any knowledge in any book in their library that probably isn't AGI, if they can make inferences on this knowledge to create new knowledge is that AGI? How complex and novel do those inferences have to be, before they are an AGI? What if we have a LLM that strongly surpasses human intellectual activities in every regard but one or two?
> The obvious guesses (greater propaganda and internet spam) are likely shortsighted.
Better censorship, better filtering of propaganda, internet/phone spam, and probably most importantly cheaper moderation of online spaces. If you control the LLM that filters/moderates your feeds, then you can build a reality tunnel for yourself and/or control your dosage of memetic toxins. If you do not control the LLM that filters/moderates your feeds, then hopefully it is run by a competent and transparent organization that has your best interests at heart. If it is not, you are in big trouble. Much like sedentary agriculture, once a human society gains adopts this technology it is the both the solution and cause of most problems.
The thing that worries me the most about LMM is the ability to create addictive media. Humans become addicted to porn, gambling, feeling strong emotions, exploitative freemium games, etc... A slot machine is not a complex machine. It is a product of 20th Century industrial production: simple, designed to appeal to the average human who visits a casino. What would slot machine look like if it was customized to each individual to be as addictive as possible and that was always learning and shaping that experience to maximize engagement and extract money? By how much would it increase the number of people who have addictions? What sort of parasocial relationships could an LLM create, if it was designed to create and exploit parasocial relationships?