• Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    The fun thing with AI that companies are starting to realize is that there’s no way to “program” AI, and I just love that. The only way to guide it is by retraining models (and LLMs will just always have stuff you don’t like in them), or using more AI to say “Was that response okay?” which is imperfect.

    And I am just loving the fallout.

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Using another AI to detect if an AI is misbehaving just sounds like the halting problem but with more steps.

        • Natanael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          As long as you can correctly model the target behavior in a sufficiently complete way, and capture all necessary context in the inputs!

      • marcos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Lots of things in AI make no sense and really shouldn’t work… except that they do.

        Deep learning is one of those.

    • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The best part is they don’t understand the cost of that retraining. The non-engineer marketing types in my field suggest AI as a potential solution to any technical problem they possibly can. One of the product owners who’s more technically inclined finally had enough during a recent meeting and straight up to told those guys “AI is the least efficient way to solve any technical problem, and should only be considered if everything else has failed”. I wanted to shake his hand right then and there.

    • bbuez@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The fallout of image generation will be even more incredible imo. Even if models do become even more capable, training off of post-'21 data will become increasingly polluted and difficult to distinguish as models improve their output, which inevitably leads to model collapse. At least until we have a standardized way of flagging generated images opposed to real ones, but I don’t really like that future.

      Just on a tangent, openai claiming video models will help “AGI” understand the world around it is laughable to me. 3blue1brown released a very informative video on how text transformers work, and in principal all “AI” is at the moment is very clever statistics and lots of matrix multiplication. How our minds process and retain information is by far more complicated, as we don’t fully understand ourselves yet and we are a grand leap away from ever emulating a true mind.

      All that to say is I can’t wait for people to realize: oh hey that is just to try to replace talent in film production coming from silicon valley

      • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I see this a lot, but do you really think the big players haven’t backed up the pre-22 datasets? Also, synthetic (LLM generated) data is routinely used in fine tuning to good effect, it’s likely that architectures exist that can happily do primary training on synthetic as well.