zlacker

[return to "Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI"]
1. zoogen+Ix[view] [source] 2024-05-15 04:50:43
>>wavela+(OP)
Interesting, both Karpathy and Sutskever are gone from OpenAI now. Looks like it is now the Sam Altman and Greg Brockman show.

I have to admit, of the four, Karpathy and Sutskever were the two I was most impressed with. I hope he goes on to do something great.

◧◩
2. nabla9+pH[view] [source] 2024-05-15 06:45:38
>>zoogen+Ix
Top 6 science guys are long gone. Open AI is run by marketing, business, software and productization people.

When the next wave of new deep learning innovations sweeps the world, Microsoft eats whats left of them. They make lots of money, but don't have future unless they replace what they lost.

◧◩◪
3. fnordp+SH[view] [source] 2024-05-15 06:52:31
>>nabla9+pH
I don’t feel that OpenAI has a huge moat against say Anthropic. And I don’t know OpenAI needs Microsoft nearly as much as Microsoft needs OpenAI
◧◩◪◨
4. cm2187+bN[view] [source] 2024-05-15 07:49:53
>>fnordp+SH
But is it even clear what is the next big leap after LLM? I have the feeling many tend to extrapolate the progress of AI from the last 2 years to the next 30 years but research doesn't always work like that (though improvements in computing power did).
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. bsenft+F21[view] [source] 2024-05-15 10:36:47
>>cm2187+bN
The majority of the developers may know what LLMs are in an abstract sense, but I meet very few that really realize what these are. These LLMs are an exponential leap in computational capability. The next revolution is going to be when people realize what we have already, because it is extremely clear the majority do not. RAG? Chatbots? Those applications are toys compared to what LLMS can do right now, yet everyone is dicking around making lusty chatbots or naked celebrities in private.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. sheesh+331[view] [source] 2024-05-15 10:43:06
>>bsenft+F21
> The next revolution is going to be when people realize what we have already

Enlighten us

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. bsenft+f51[view] [source] 2024-05-15 11:06:45
>>sheesh+331
It is both subtle and obvious, yet many are missing this: if you want/need a deep subject matter expert in virtually any subject, write a narrative biography describing your expert using the same language that expert would use to describe themselves; this generates a context within the LLM carrying that subject matter expertise, and now significantly higher quality responses are generated. Duplicate this process for several instances of your LLM, creating a home brewed collection of experts, and have them collectively respond to one's prompts as a group privately, and then present their best solution. Now there is a method of generating higher reliability responses. Now turn to the fact that the LLMs are trained on an Internet corpus of data that contains the documentation and support forums for every major software application; using the building blocks described so far, it is not difficult at all to create agents that sit between the user and pretty much every popular software application and act as co-authors with the user helping them use that application.

I have integrated 6 independent, specialized "AI attorneys" into a project management system where they are collaborating with "AI web developers", "AI creative writers", "AI spreadsheet gurus", "AI negotiators", "AI financial analysts" and an "AI educational psychologist" that looks at the user, the nature and quality of their requests, and makes a determination of how much help the user really needs, modulating how much help the other agents provide.

I've got a separate implementation that is all home solar do-it-yourself, that can guide someone from nothing all the way to their own self made home solar setup.

Currently working on a new version that exposes my agent creation UI with a boatload of documentation, aimed at general consumers. If one can write well, as in write quality prose, that person can completely master using these LLMs to superior results.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. itsokt+sa1[view] [source] 2024-05-15 11:47:40
>>bsenft+f51
>I have integrated 6 independent, specialized "AI attorneys" into a project management system where they are collaborating with "AI web developers", "AI creative writers", "AI spreadsheet gurus", "AI negotiators", "AI financial analysts" and an "AI educational psychologist" that looks at the user, the nature and quality of their requests, and makes a determination of how much help the user really needs, modulating how much help the other agents provide.

Ah yes, "it's so obvious no one sees it but me". Until you show people your work, and have real experts examining the results, I'm going to remain skeptical and assume you have LLMs talking nonsense to each each other.

[go to top]