this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2024
749 points (97.8% liked)

Fuck AI

1180 readers
81 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

when you ask them simple maths questions from around the time they were trained they got them all right. When they specifically prompted it with questions that provably were published one year later, albeit at the same difficulty, it got 100% wrong answers. You'd be amazed at what one can find on the internet and just how muqh scraping they did to gather it all. 10 years ago is quite recent. Why wouldn't there be documentation? (regardless of whether you managed to find it?) If it's non standard, then I would expect something that is specifically about it somewhere in the training set, whereas the standard compliant stuff wouldn't need a specific make and model to be mentioned.

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

GPT scores in the top 1% in creativity. There is no need to discuss this. Anyone can try. It is super easy to come up with a unique question. Be it with stacking items or anything else. It is not just copying existing info.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago

only if you deviate only slightly from their training set