Did nobody really question the usability of language models in designing war strategies?
4 points
To be fair they’re not accidentally good enough: they’re intentionally good enough.
That’s where all the salary money went: to find people who could make them intentionally.
6 points
GPT 2 was just a bullshit generator. It was like a politician trying to explain something they know nothing about.
GPT 3.0 was just a bigger version of version 2. It was the same architecture but with more nodes and data as far as I followed the research. But that one could suddenly do a lot more than the previous version, so by accident. And then the AI scene exploded.
2 points
