zlacker

>>isaacf+(OP)
This seems an important article, if for no other reason than it brings the betrayal of its foundational claim still brazenly present in OpenAI's name from the obscurity of HN comments going back years into the public light and the mainstream.

They've achieved marvellous things, OpenAI, but the pivot and long-standing refusal to deal with it honestly leaves an unpleasant taste, and doesn't bode well for the future, especially considering the enormous ethical implications of advantage in the field they are leading.

>>mellos+pe
To quote Spaceballs, they're not doing it for money, they're doing it for a shitload of money.

>>ripper+yr
OpenAI, if successful, will likely become the most valuable company in the history of the planet, both past and future.

>>93po+7N
It’s just an autocomplete engine. Someone else will achieve AGI and OpenAI falls apart very quickly when that occurs.

>>berkle+8T
No, it's not just an autocomplete engine. The underlying neural network architecture is a transformer. It certainly can do "autocomplete" (or riffs on autocomplete), but it can also do a lot more. It doesn't take much thought to realize that being REALLY good at autocomplete means that you need to learn how to do a lot of other things as well.

At the end of the day the "predict next word" training goal of LLMs is the ultimate intelligence test. If you could always answer that "correctly" (i.e. intelligently) you'd be a polymath genius. Focusing on the "next word" ("autocomplete") aspect of this, and ignoring the knowledge/intelligence needed to do WELL at it is rather misleading!

"The best way to combine quantum mechanics and general relativity into a single theory of everything is ..."

>>HarHar+bC1
Wouldn't the ultimate intelligence test involve manipulating the real world? That seems orders of magnitude harder than autocompletion. For a theory of everything, you would probably have to perform some experiments that don't currently exist.