zlacker

>>vforgi+(OP)
Imagine thinking that regression based function approximators are capable of anything other than fitting the data you give it. Then imagine willfully hyping up and scaring people who don't understand, and because it can predict words you take advantage of the human tendency to anthropomorphize, so it follows that it is something capable of generalized and adaptable intelligence.

Shame on all of the people involved in this: the people in these companies, the journalists who shovel shit (hope they get replaced real soon), researchers who should know better, and dementia ridden legislators.

So utterly predictable and slimy. All of those who are so gravely concerned about "alignment" in this context, give yourselves a pat on the back for hyping up science fiction stories and enabling regulatory capture.

>>srslac+I7
What do you think about the papers showing mathematical proofs that GNNs (i.e. GATs/transformers) are dynamic programmers and therefore perform algorithmic reasoning?

The fact that these systems can extrapolate well beyond their training data by learning algorithms is quite different than what has come before, and anyone stating that they "simply" predict next token is severely shortsighted. Things don't have to be 'brain-like' to be useful, or to have capabilities of reasoning, but we have evidence that these systems have aligned well with reasoning tasks, perform well at causal reasoning, and we also have mathematical proofs that show how.

So I don't understand your sentiment.

>>chaxor+hB
I just don't get how the average HN commenter thinks (and gets upvoted) that they know better than e.g. Ilya Sutskever who actually, you know, built the system. I keep reading this "it just predicts words, duh" rhetoric on HN which is not at all believed by people like Ilya or Hinton. Could it be that HN commenters know better than these people?

>>uh_uh+8E
No one is claiming to know better than Ilya. Just recognition of the fact that such a license would benefit these same individuals (or their employers) the most. I don't understand how HN can be so angry about a company that benefits from tax law (Intuit) advocating for regulation while also supporting a company that would benefit from an AI license (OpenAI) advocating for such regulation. The conflict of interest isn't even subtle. To your point, why isn't Ilya addressing the committee?

>>hervat+2P
2 reasons:

1. He's too busy building the next generation of tech that HN commenters will be arguing about in a couple months' time.

2. I think Sam Altman (who is addressing the committee) and Ilya are pretty much on the same page on what LLMs do.