this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2024
667 points (87.9% liked)

Memes

45660 readers
1501 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I think AI is neat.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (14 children)

So super informed OP, tell me how they work. technically, not CEO press release speak. explain the theory.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago (13 children)

I'm not OP, and frankly I don't really disagree with the characterization of ChatGPT as "fancy autocomplete". But...

I'm still in the process of reading this cover-to-cover, but Chapter 12.2 of Deep Learning: Foundations and Concepts by Bishop and Bishop explains how natural language transformers work, and then has a short section about LLMs. All of this is in the context of a detailed explanation of the fundamentals of deep learning. The book cites the original papers from which it is derived, most of which are on ArXiv. There's a nice copy on Library Genesis. It requires some multi-variable probability and statistics, and an assload of linear algebra, reviews of which are included.

So obviously when the CEO explains their product they're going to say anything to make the public accept it. Therefore, their word should not be trusted. However, I think that when AI researchers talk simply about their work, they're trying to shield people from the mathematical details. Fact of the matter is that behind even a basic AI is a shitload of complicated math.

At least from personal experience, people tend to get really aggressive when I try to explain math concepts to them. So they're probably assuming based on their experience that you would be better served by some clumsy heuristic explanation.

IMO it is super important for tech-inclined people interested in making the world a better place to learn the fundamentals and limitations of machine learning (what we typically call "AI") and bring their benefits to the common people. Clearly, these technologies are a boon for the wealthy and powerful, and like always, have been used to fuck over everyone else.

IMO, as it is, AI as a technology has inherent patterns that induce centralization of power, particularly with respect to the requirement of massive datasets, particularly for LLMs, and the requirement to understand mathematical fundamentals that only the wealthy can afford to go to school long enough to learn. However, I still think that we can leverage AI technologies for the common good, particularly by developing open-source alternatives, encouraging the use of open and ethically sourced datasets, and distributing the computing load so that people who can't afford a fancy TPU can still use AI somehow.

I wrote all this because I think that people dismiss AI because it is "needlessly" complex and therefore bullshit. In my view, it is necessarily complex because of the transformative potential it has. If and only if you can spare the time, then I encourage you to learn about machine learning, particularly deep learning and LLMs.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Fact of the matter is that behind even a basic AI is a shitload of complicated math.

Depending on how simple something can be to be considered an AI, the math is surprisingly simple compared to what an average person might expect. The theory behind it took a good amount of effort to develop, but to make something like a basic image categorizer (eg. optical character recognition) you really just need some matrix multiplication and calculating derivatives-- non-math-major college math type stuff.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 months ago

Come on.. It's not impressive to just not be aware of where the bar is for most people. No, it's not complex math but you are debating people that read headlines only and then go fully into imagination of what it says

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)