I knew there would be these kinds of comments making this obvious point. This is just a demo of how these language models are not going to achieve the “General” part of AGI. It’s going to take a new paradigm
Too many people forget that specialized, purpose-driven software is often if more effective and efficient. LLMs and other AI are nice when you don’t have a properly defined spec or a flexible algorithm but you pay, literally, for the convenience.
deleted by creator
Its because of all the people saying that LLMs can reason and think and the human brain works just like an LLM and… some other ridiculous claim.
This shows some limitations on LLMs.
Human brains lose to computerized chess all the time, though. So I guess this is a win for AI tech bros?
Why the special qualifier of “computerized” chess? Do humans regularly lose to Atari’s at chess? LLMs are computerized too.
It depends on the human.
I’d wager children would lose quite often.
I meant a specialized application, like the Atari one that beat the LLM.
But humans not trained (made) for chess would make stupid mistakes too
Why are so many people mad when it’s pointed out that the shitty chatbots are just shitty chatbots.
Now apply this to like, everything else ever.
Machine designed to convincingly fake human internet conversation sucks at ____________!
ChatGPT can’t make a rug as well as a 300 year old loom.
I knew there would be these kinds of comments making this obvious point. This is just a demo of how these language models are not going to achieve the “General” part of AGI. It’s going to take a new paradigm
Too many people forget that specialized, purpose-driven software is often if more effective and efficient. LLMs and other AI are nice when you don’t have a properly defined spec or a flexible algorithm but you pay, literally, for the convenience.
40 year old machine designed to play chess*