5 ms·

> Supportive. We build models to support our users, not replace them. We are focused on efficient, specialized, and practical AI performance – not a quest for g

by prions 3y ago

> Supportive. We build models to support our users, not replace them. We are focused on efficient, specialized, and practical AI performance – not a quest for god-like intelligence. We develop tools that help everyday people and everyday firms use AI to unlock creativity, boost their productivity, and open up new economic opportunities. Refreshing take on the peak alarmism we see from tech "thought leaders"

seydor 3y ago
Doesn't sell as much, though
CamperBob2 3y ago
I dunno... god-like intelligence would be pretty useful. I'll take a brochure.
- nashashmi 3y ago
  do you trust god?
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    Well, ... OK, I withdraw the comment.
  - sdenton4 3y ago
    Why should I need to? Isn't God on the blockchain? (j/k)
  - int_19h 3y ago
    Depends on which one. All the ones described in religious books seem to have very poor alignment, though.
antibasilisk 3y ago
>Refreshing take on the peak alarmism we see from tech "thought leaders" It's not alarmism when people have openly stated their intent to do those things.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  Its alarmism to support government regulation to reinforce the moat when industry leaders say they intend to do it, but also that the danger of it being done is why competition with them must be restricted by the State (and why they can’t, despite being, or being a subsidiary of, a nonprofit founded on an openness mission, share any substantive information on their current models.)
reubenmorais 3y ago
This is just marketing. They're positioning themselves as somehow "more human" while building the exact same technology. When a model supports me by doing the work I'd otherwise hire someone to do, the model just replaced someone. And this goes without saying, but a large amount of outsourced tasks today don't exactly require "god-like intelligence".
- rmbyrro 3y ago
  That was probably said about the automobile, when it replaced horses, or about electrical lamps, when replaced oil-based lamps, no? I mean, every city had an army of people to light up and down oil lamps in the streets, and these jobs went away. But people were freed up to do better stuff.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - leovailati 3y ago
    It is different this time. I bet that was also said when the transformations that you mentioned occurred, but this time it really is different. LLM models are pretty general in their capabilities, so it is not like the relatively slow process of electrification, when lamplighters lost their jobs. Everyone can lose their jobs in a matter of months because AI can do close to everything. I am excited to live in a world where AI has "freed" humans from wage slavery, but our economic system is not ready to deal with that yet.
    - Zuiii 3y ago
      > but this time it really is different I'm skeptical. This will drastically change what it means to do a job in a way that has never happened before, but humans will find a way to deal with the fallout. We don't have a choice. Besides, if we were able to disrupt the very foundations of our economy for a minor virus, we can and will do the same to deal with this if required. Either way this change has already arrived and we are starting to adapt our lives in response to it like we have many times in the past. tldr: This change is significant but we'll manage.
garbagecoder 3y ago
Yeah all the Terminator energy around these AI things is so off-putting. They aren't like that. They're big matrices and they are very cool tools!
- bbor 3y ago
  What if big matrices are the last missing piece to research going on since the 50s…
- circuit10 3y ago
  But the concerns about AI taking over the world are valid and important; even if they sound silly at first, there is some very solid reasoning behind it. They’re big matrices, yes, but they’re Turing-complete which means they can theoretically do any computational task See https://youtu.be/tcdVC4e6EV4 https://youtu.be/tcdVC4e6EV4 for a really interesting video on why a theoretical superintelligent AI would be dangerous, and when you factor in that these models could self-improve and approach that level of intelligence it gets worrying…
  - garbagecoder 3y ago
    This comment basically implies I don't get it, but I will if I watch a Youtube video. I get it. ChatGPT isn't that. That's the point. You can have concerns about AGI. That's fine. But they have nothing to do with LLMs unless you are trying to play a shell game.
    - circuit10 3y ago
      But you were talking about AI in general and dismissing the risk entirely as sci-fi. I think a large enough LLM, or at least a slightly modified one, could lead to AGI and we’re not as far from it as you think
- cubefox 3y ago
  > They're big matrices and they are very cool tools! Well, your mom is a etc Edit: Since this is getting downvoted I'll be more explicit: The human brain may well be also just described as some simple sort of thing, but that doesn't mean humans are not dangerous, nor hypothetical humans with a brain ten times as large and a million times faster. The worry about AIs killing all humans soon is not naive just by sounding naive.
varunjain99 3y ago
Well, it's to their benefit to portray their models as working alongside and enhancing humans, as opposed to replacing us. So it sounds a bit like marketing speak to me. And it's to the benefit of many of those tech "thought leaders" to be alarmist since they don't have much of the AI pie
gumballindie 3y ago
Well exactly. AI _is_ a tool and a very good one at that.
yeck 3y ago
"It is refreshing to hear opinions I already agree with. People with other opinions are unintelligent" Is that what you were trying to convey? If not, I'm curious to know what you find refreshing about it and why those who disagree are wrapped in double quotes.

by prions 3y ago

seydor 3y ago

Doesn't sell as much, though

CamperBob2 3y ago

I dunno... god-like intelligence would be pretty useful. I'll take a brochure.

nashashmi 3y ago
do you trust god?
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  Well, ... OK, I withdraw the comment.
- sdenton4 3y ago
  Why should I need to? Isn't God on the blockchain? (j/k)
- int_19h 3y ago
  Depends on which one. All the ones described in religious books seem to have very poor alignment, though.

antibasilisk 3y ago

>Refreshing take on the peak alarmism we see from tech "thought leaders" It's not alarmism when people have openly stated their intent to do those things.

dragonwriter 3y ago
Its alarmism to support government regulation to reinforce the moat when industry leaders say they intend to do it, but also that the danger of it being done is why competition with them must be restricted by the State (and why they can’t, despite being, or being a subsidiary of, a nonprofit founded on an openness mission, share any substantive information on their current models.)

reubenmorais 3y ago

This is just marketing. They're positioning themselves as somehow "more human" while building the exact same technology. When a model supports me by doing the work I'd otherwise hire someone to do, the model just replaced someone. And this goes without saying, but a large amount of outsourced tasks today don't exactly require "god-like intelligence".

rmbyrro 3y ago
That was probably said about the automobile, when it replaced horses, or about electrical lamps, when replaced oil-based lamps, no? I mean, every city had an army of people to light up and down oil lamps in the streets, and these jobs went away. But people were freed up to do better stuff.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- leovailati 3y ago
  It is different this time. I bet that was also said when the transformations that you mentioned occurred, but this time it really is different. LLM models are pretty general in their capabilities, so it is not like the relatively slow process of electrification, when lamplighters lost their jobs. Everyone can lose their jobs in a matter of months because AI can do close to everything. I am excited to live in a world where AI has "freed" humans from wage slavery, but our economic system is not ready to deal with that yet.
  - Zuiii 3y ago
    > but this time it really is different I'm skeptical. This will drastically change what it means to do a job in a way that has never happened before, but humans will find a way to deal with the fallout. We don't have a choice. Besides, if we were able to disrupt the very foundations of our economy for a minor virus, we can and will do the same to deal with this if required. Either way this change has already arrived and we are starting to adapt our lives in response to it like we have many times in the past. tldr: This change is significant but we'll manage.

garbagecoder 3y ago

Yeah all the Terminator energy around these AI things is so off-putting. They aren't like that. They're big matrices and they are very cool tools!

bbor 3y ago
What if big matrices are the last missing piece to research going on since the 50s…
circuit10 3y ago
But the concerns about AI taking over the world are valid and important; even if they sound silly at first, there is some very solid reasoning behind it. They’re big matrices, yes, but they’re Turing-complete which means they can theoretically do any computational task See https://youtu.be/tcdVC4e6EV4 https://youtu.be/tcdVC4e6EV4 for a really interesting video on why a theoretical superintelligent AI would be dangerous, and when you factor in that these models could self-improve and approach that level of intelligence it gets worrying…
- garbagecoder 3y ago
  This comment basically implies I don't get it, but I will if I watch a Youtube video. I get it. ChatGPT isn't that. That's the point. You can have concerns about AGI. That's fine. But they have nothing to do with LLMs unless you are trying to play a shell game.
  - circuit10 3y ago
    But you were talking about AI in general and dismissing the risk entirely as sci-fi. I think a large enough LLM, or at least a slightly modified one, could lead to AGI and we’re not as far from it as you think
cubefox 3y ago
> They're big matrices and they are very cool tools! Well, your mom is a etc Edit: Since this is getting downvoted I'll be more explicit: The human brain may well be also just described as some simple sort of thing, but that doesn't mean humans are not dangerous, nor hypothetical humans with a brain ten times as large and a million times faster. The worry about AIs killing all humans soon is not naive just by sounding naive.

varunjain99 3y ago

Well, it's to their benefit to portray their models as working alongside and enhancing humans, as opposed to replacing us. So it sounds a bit like marketing speak to me. And it's to the benefit of many of those tech "thought leaders" to be alarmist since they don't have much of the AI pie

gumballindie 3y ago

Well exactly. AI _is_ a tool and a very good one at that.

yeck 3y ago

"It is refreshing to hear opinions I already agree with. People with other opinions are unintelligent" Is that what you were trying to convey? If not, I'm curious to know what you find refreshing about it and why those who disagree are wrapped in double quotes.