I’m not guessing. When I say it’s a difference of kind, I really did mean that. There is no cognition here; and we know enough about cognition to say that LLMs are not performing anything like it.
We do not know that, I challenge you to find a source for that, in fact, i've seen sources showing the opposite, they seem to reason in tokens, for example, LLM's perform significantly better at tasks when asked to give a step by step reasoned explanation, this indicates that they are doing a form of reasoning, and their reasoning is limited by what I have no better term for than laziness.
If I teach a real AI about fishing, it should be able to reason about fishing and it shouldn’t need to have read a supplementary knowledge of mankind to do it.
This is a faulty assumption.
In order for you to learn about fishing, you had to learn a shitload about the world. Babies don't come out of the womb able to do such tasks, there is a shitload of prerequisite knowledge in order to fish, it's unfair to expect an ai to do this without prerequisite knowledge.
Furthermore, LLM's have been shown to do many things that aren't in their training data, so the notion that it's a stochastic parrot is also false.
You're guessing, you don't actually know that for sure, it seems intuitively correct, but we simply do not know enough about cognition to make that assumption.
Perhaps our ability to reason exclusively comes from our ability to predict, and by scaling up the ability to predict, we become more and more able to reason.
These are guesses, all we have now are guesses, you can say "it doesn't reason" and "it's just autocorrect" all you want, but if that were the case why did scaling it up eventually enable it to perform basic math? Why did scaling it up improve its ability to problemsolve significantly (gpt3 vs gpt4), there's so many unknowns in this field, to just say "nah, can't be, it works differently from us" doesn't mean it can't do the same things as us given enough scale.
We don't know that for sure yet, we saw a lot of emergent intelligent properties appear as we scaled up, and we're nowhere near done scaling LLM's, I'm not saying it will be solved, just that we don't know one way or the other yet.
This isn't a reason federation doesn't work at all, that implies a fundamental issue with federation, this is why focusing on performance instead of mod tools and helping content filtering doesn't work, the same would've happened to a massive centralized service without proper mod tools.
There may be a need for improvement overtime... but that has nothing to do with if competition is helpful.
This is free open source software, it's better to have many people working together on one project than a bunch of projects being worked on separately, for reasons I think are obvious.
There isn't a race to be the king of the fediverse, competition does nothing but make people work separately on something that should be worked on cooperatively, it accomplishes nothing but slowing down development. If we used competition, when a new feature was implemented, now instead of it being implemented for everyone, it'll be implemented in one particular codebase, and if other people want to implement it, there will be a massive duplication of effort.
What does competition in this space actually do for the community? As far as I see it, absolutely nothing at all, except duplicating effort.
No... it can just be better, it doesn't have to be better than the competition, this is a bizarre assumption you're making here. We're talking about a website where you post small snippets of text, there isn't really much innovation to be done here, and even if there were, open standards that people co-operate on will see faster progress than a bunch of people trying to make the exact same thing separately.
You seem to believe that it's impossible to just improve and innovate without competition, but that's simply not the case.
Competition often does not drive innovation in the software world, quite the opposite, free open source software allows collaboration between many people to better innovate than competition ever could, especially in this particular space.
I think the notion that humans are evil means you must be a conservative is laughable honestly. I'm a communist and I certainly don't believe humans are naturally good or selfless in any way.
Communist @ communist @beehaw.org Posts 6Comments 94Joined 2 yr. ago
We do not know that, I challenge you to find a source for that, in fact, i've seen sources showing the opposite, they seem to reason in tokens, for example, LLM's perform significantly better at tasks when asked to give a step by step reasoned explanation, this indicates that they are doing a form of reasoning, and their reasoning is limited by what I have no better term for than laziness.
https://blog.research.google/2022/05/language-models-perform-reasoning-via.html