You think the writer’s strike is part of a conspiracy to prop up Republicans for an election in a year and a half?

Good choice

Maybe. But if I was thinking about buying into their ipo I might be pretty skeptical of a social media site that’s actively antagonizing their users while it can barely turn a profit when 90% of their labor force are unpaid volunteers.

Engagement can be fleeting and I’m not sure their archive content is as valuable to LLMs as they think it is.

If all these scientists and engineers are so much smarter than Musk, how come they never had the idea to just understand the universe? 🤔

I also find it quite unpleasant that the elected representatives, in all this time, did not try to replace it with grassroot level measure such as food security, free tuition, books etc. higher school and teacher density in lower income or low performing areas.

So you support leftist ambitions, but because of some nonsense on Twitter you feel obligated to give credence to actual, flag-waving, “we’re coming to take your kids and throw you in prison,” nazis?

Holy shit you’re the guy from the meme

I completely fail to see how it wouldn’t be considered transformative work

Lol. That’s a skin suit

Even if you buy that premise, the output of the robot is only superficially similar to the work it was trained on, so no copyright infringement there, and the training process itself is done by humans, and it takes some tortured logic to deny the technology’s transformative nature

The last thing he put out was “The World of Tomorrow” trilogy between 2016 and 2020. It was pretty good.

I also highly recommend “It’s such a beautiful day” if you haven’t seen it

So for context, I am an applied mathematician, and I primarily work in neural computation. I have an essentially cursory knowledge of LLMs, their architecture, and the mathematics of how they work.

I hear this argument, that LLMs are glorified autocomplete and merely statistical inference machines and are therefore completely divorced from anything resembling human thought.

I feel the need to point out that not only is there no compelling evidence that any neural computation that humans do anything different from a statistical inference machine, there’s actually quite a bit of evidence that that is exactly what real, biological neural networks do.

Now, admittedly, real neurons and real neural networks are way more sophisticated than any deep learning network module, real neural networks are extremely recurrent and extremely nonlinear, with some neural circuits devoted to simply changing how other neural circuits process signals without actually processing said signals on their own. And in the case of humans, several orders of magnitude larger than even the largest LLM.

All that said, it boils down to an insanely powerful statistical machine.

There are questions of motivation and input: we all want to stay alive (ish), avoid pain, and have constant feedback from sensory organs while a LLM just produces what it was supposed to. But in an abstraction the ideas of wants and needs and rewards aren’t substantively different from prompts.

Anyway. I agree that modern AI is a poor substitute for real human intelligence, but the fundamental reason is a matter of complexity, not method.

Some reading:

Large scale neural recordings call for new insights to link brain and behavior

A unifying perspective on neural manifolds and circuits for cognition

a comparison of neuronal population dynamics measured with calcium imaging and electrophysiology