It was better when it was just ifs and for loops and runs on potatoes and does actually useful things.
And the human brain is just fatty tissue and neurons.
A donut is just a hole with a circle drawn around it.
A circle is just a shape with one side
It’s just a series of 10 trillion floats. And we don’t really know what the individual floats represent and changing them degrades performance but hey
Technically. It’s just if statements.
Cool; walk me through attention layers plz.
Yeah. It’s some if statements and some loops but with CUDA and matrix multiplication
Great; that describes all functions, so we’ve nothing to worry about.
No no we still gotta worry about people in power allowing the worst possible use of technology at everyone’s expense for personal gain…
So same old
What specifically do you want the people in power to do?
A very good start would be people not having that much power to begin with. Especially not if they’re not democratically elected representatives.
But for the people in power we’re seemingly talking about (AI company leaders):
- Not presenting AI as something mystical/mythical
- Not turning AI into a product tailored to be addictive
- Not framing AI as a tech only they can be trusted to keep and distribute (see also point 1)
- Maybe developing the technology towards what gives most utility, not what earns them the most money (fat chance)
I just want these AI companies to be held accountable for openly trying to hack everyone. It’s ridiculous they’re allowed to hide behind “AI did it, not us” as if what their product does isn’t their responsibility.
Think of it as a game, the players are corpo, and gov.
Corpo hacks planet, gov says, “Hm, that’s pretty bad corpo, we could hold you accountable… but… that’s pretty neat, maybe share a lil with us how you achieved this terrible incident (that we totally don’t want to leverage against international peers) and we can forget this happened…”
A game of incentives.
If the gov comes down too hard, they could slow the development, the same development that they short-sightedly want to exploit in parallel with the accused.
- Not presenting AI as something mystical/mythical
this is hard, it’s pretty awesome. How would you want it presented? As a boring tool that does nothing important? Not understanding. The product sells itself to those who see value
- Not turning AI into a product tailored to be addictive
Is this something they’re doing?
- Not framing AI as a tech only they can be trusted to keep and distribute (see also point 1)
Agreed; open weight models are kicking their ass with this tho. I run local only.
- Maybe developing the technology towards what gives most utility
are we not doing that? Why do you need them for this?
Regulation? I mean is this really an honest question? Are you really that unfamiliar with what regulation is?
Please explain what this one specific weight is, and why that value shouldn’t be higher or lower.
Explain to me how a weight = an IF statement or a FOR loop
Here you go: Let’s build GPT: from scratch, in code, spelled out.
GPT is basically a machine that builds machines.
We understand how the machine builder works. We don’t understand how the output of the machine works. Like mechanically we understand each individual sub-component works e.g. a single matrix multiplication, but we don’t understand why specific weights are the value they are, or the broader macrostructure.
I don’t think you realize that acting like “No we actually do understand how it works” just reveals that you don’t understand the question, it does not show that the question has an answer.
not really it is mostly automatic gradients on billion parameters and shit loads of regularization.
Ha, in fact it’s all GOTO jumps like on a trampoline.
It’s all just NAND gates?
YandereGPT
“It’s like Blade Runner, but we’ll make sure the robots aren’t the villains this time” – some billionaire, probably
It’s not really code though is it. It’s just a lot of numbers and those numbers somehow do things. Like it says no one understands it.
