XxxRDTPRNxxX, log into chatgpt 4o and try this for yourself.
The math and sorting works fine.
I didnt ask it the women question because they're all being made to tow the line on woke shit.
I have been using AI for a while now and I have experienced at one point most of these issues you highlight. gpt4o still has stupid limitations, but not most of the ones you talk about.
You aren't using it correctly. Like any tool, its about knowing how to properly use it.
It can't do math so don't use it for math.
Instead of having the AI sort it, you ask it to write a script to sort any generic list for you. Now you have a program that will do it whenever you need without needing to query the AI and unlike the AI, the script works flawlessly.
Hallucination is real, this is why you need to check its work. Depending on the use case you can find whether or not its more time consuming to check the work or not.
Don't use it for getting information regarding the truth about things where there is heavy propaganda.
Why would you use it for things that are simple to look up?
Use it for summarizing things, writing code, getting feedback on your own writing, etc. Don't use it to write for you it will sound obviously generated. You can also very successfully use it to write code to access data for you. For example, once I wanted to verify if the guy who claimed you can predict earthquakes with planetary alignments. I had it write a script to get the planetary location data for me. Had something working in a couple hours what normally would have taken much longer to figure out where to find the data, how to process it, etc.
True, I just think you have to think of it as a tool which has certain valid use cases and others that aren't valid. Thinking of it as "intelligence" is an incorrect way of looking at it born out of false advertising.
Models have different capabilities. Some can't keep track of more than 20 items at a time. Just this week have they gained the ability to redraw characters.. Its like their short term memory isn't sorted out yet.
But it's coming
They learned to see this month. Vision. Gonna get interesting.
The real question still is are they automatons or thinking?
You didn't mention AI art huh? Those shit gotta be annoying. Like really. But the fun thing is if you draw something yourself you pretty much have control over everything while the AI occasionally just trolls you. It's not going to make everything obsolete for a long time.
At now the main thing at the forefront is when the elite decides that all useless eaters are to be slaughtered.
AI is nice for stock art. Nothing of consequence. But nice to not have to pick it or pay attribution for a stock pic you don't really care about except for some article or something
Why do you guys still don't get that "AI" is not AI at all? It have nothing to do with intelligence at all. It is so called "Artificial Neural Network" which is basically nothing more than a system of equations, which just produce result which can be described like "combination of most often replies in texts used for training" and nothing more.
So nearly all your points just have no any sense.
It understand nothing, it just never was trained on answers with values you entered.
It was never trained on something exactly like your grocery list, so just give something as close as possible.
It does not understand anything about episodes, it is just give you some average of episode descriptions it was trained on.
It just show most frequent answer that occur more often in training data.
And so on. There is nothing strange or unexpectable at all in all that "AI" stuff for those who don't buy all that marketing and just studied how that simple thing really works.
It is kind of leaking of magic type conscioness into our techological reality. Instead of explaining new technologies, those who want to control them present them as magic. Any kind of magic is nothing more than technology that is unknown to those who don't want to know how things really works. And with time, instead of less and less magic consiousness, we have completely opposite result - everything around becomes some magic for average Joe or Jane. Seems IT industry suffer this much more than other, but I already meet people who don't understand how their cars or even coffee machines works and think it is just magic.
No it's not......it's code is laughable. It's not even great except for atomic operations.
It will literally hallucinate variables, make up functions that are slightly different names then they are supposed to be, it is not even great at making comments for code.
It struggles to optimize anything, and while it can spot syntax errors it will typically fail to recognize scale problems or issues with structural problems. It also loves adding things that do nothing or unnecessary stuff.
When asked for specifics it fails to deliver and usually the only thing it can do is auto complete after some repetition.
It helps speed up tedious tasks and boiler plate....but it fails to deliver logic. I have also not been able to successfully optimize my code and I am sure it's not fully optimized.
It also fails to build anything larger than a chat bot conceptually. It cannot fathom all the interconnectedness....most programmers can't either. So the prompts are inadequate....
Also.....code is typically around a typical context - ie Domain. So it tends to be information dense and also can be multiple states based on conditions of the situation, whereas the LLM are outputting based on a closed solution. They will typically generalize and cannot provide the necessary insight that would be needed...and how would the programmer know unless they also have the knowledge.....
We are back to TDD now....we need to have all the tests for the AI to be checked against.....
It is written as instructions....but not the same way as language is used. (Coding is performing actions.....the computer does stuff....)
Language like prose and poetry follow grammar that is used to convey ideas.....not perform actions.
You do not speak and have doors open without first developing an entire 'smart system' that alone can only 'open', 'close', 'swing' etc.
But those actions require a physical set of motors, actuators, controllers, a power source, a BIOS, and some kind of training.....then and only with the creative foresight of putting those things together does the word do anything....
Just like software.... It's a massive system and not just some words....
You cannot convert any program to another language.....that's a myth.....
It's based on the physical computer and the underlying instruction set and attached paraphernalia before those instructions mean anything.......
Language is incidental....but its not the primary element.....
Language is for humans.....coding is not language....
No.....you don't seem to understand the difference. Coding is system specific..... constraints based on physical systems. It does not exist alone.
At the same time, language is defined in different structures from code. You could technically define a code for people.....those are imperatives that tend to rely on societal norms and cultural common ground.
For example. Sing the national anthem. Is an instruction, but it requires a system of ideas, but code cannot create the systems.....ideas are self replicating, but code cannot make a chair.....
I meant that your examples have no sense, points in your list, not your points about very limited abilities of ANNs. Sorry.
All your examples are perfectly expectable and predictable for any user with knowledge, so no such user will ever ask them.
As for computer code, it is not just some compilation of patterns reused over and over. To write something sensible programmer should understand context and code itself. ANN could generate working code, but it does not mean this code will work correctly. There are already many articles around about attempts to generate useful code. Even "Hello world" sometimes appear surrealistic, especially for languages rare in training dataset. Worst thing is that ANN easily insert code in another language if required piece of code was not found written in specified language. For something more or less large, say from 1Kl, it is easier and faster to write everything from scratch than to review generated code and fix all nonsense.
There was attemtps to create real code generators in 90s on the basis of expert system with knowledge databases, but all of them was ostracised and declared "bad coding practice".
I see only real use for such ANNs is creating marketing ads content - senseless more or less standard texts and pictures. Or may be few other places where content does not have to have some sense, it just have to exist to attract somebody attention or occupy some area.
XxxRDTPRNxxX, log into chatgpt 4o and try this for yourself. The math and sorting works fine. I didnt ask it the women question because they're all being made to tow the line on woke shit.
I have been using AI for a while now and I have experienced at one point most of these issues you highlight. gpt4o still has stupid limitations, but not most of the ones you talk about.
You aren't using it correctly. Like any tool, its about knowing how to properly use it.
Use it for summarizing things, writing code, getting feedback on your own writing, etc. Don't use it to write for you it will sound obviously generated. You can also very successfully use it to write code to access data for you. For example, once I wanted to verify if the guy who claimed you can predict earthquakes with planetary alignments. I had it write a script to get the planetary location data for me. Had something working in a couple hours what normally would have taken much longer to figure out where to find the data, how to process it, etc.
True, I just think you have to think of it as a tool which has certain valid use cases and others that aren't valid. Thinking of it as "intelligence" is an incorrect way of looking at it born out of false advertising.
Models have different capabilities. Some can't keep track of more than 20 items at a time. Just this week have they gained the ability to redraw characters.. Its like their short term memory isn't sorted out yet.
But it's coming
They learned to see this month. Vision. Gonna get interesting.
The real question still is are they automatons or thinking?
You didn't mention AI art huh? Those shit gotta be annoying. Like really. But the fun thing is if you draw something yourself you pretty much have control over everything while the AI occasionally just trolls you. It's not going to make everything obsolete for a long time.
At now the main thing at the forefront is when the elite decides that all useless eaters are to be slaughtered.
AI is nice for stock art. Nothing of consequence. But nice to not have to pick it or pay attribution for a stock pic you don't really care about except for some article or something
Anyone with the most basic knowledge of what the systems even are designed for already knew this.
RE-sponse makes one LIABLE to suggested artifice...UN (not; nothing) implies suggested nihil-ism (Latin nihilo; nothing).
Liable implies being able to lier, liier "to bind" aka to bind self by consent to suggestions by another.
Why do you guys still don't get that "AI" is not AI at all? It have nothing to do with intelligence at all. It is so called "Artificial Neural Network" which is basically nothing more than a system of equations, which just produce result which can be described like "combination of most often replies in texts used for training" and nothing more.
So nearly all your points just have no any sense.
It understand nothing, it just never was trained on answers with values you entered.
It was never trained on something exactly like your grocery list, so just give something as close as possible.
It does not understand anything about episodes, it is just give you some average of episode descriptions it was trained on.
It just show most frequent answer that occur more often in training data.
And so on. There is nothing strange or unexpectable at all in all that "AI" stuff for those who don't buy all that marketing and just studied how that simple thing really works.
It is kind of leaking of magic type conscioness into our techological reality. Instead of explaining new technologies, those who want to control them present them as magic. Any kind of magic is nothing more than technology that is unknown to those who don't want to know how things really works. And with time, instead of less and less magic consiousness, we have completely opposite result - everything around becomes some magic for average Joe or Jane. Seems IT industry suffer this much more than other, but I already meet people who don't understand how their cars or even coffee machines works and think it is just magic.
No it's not......it's code is laughable. It's not even great except for atomic operations.
It will literally hallucinate variables, make up functions that are slightly different names then they are supposed to be, it is not even great at making comments for code.
It struggles to optimize anything, and while it can spot syntax errors it will typically fail to recognize scale problems or issues with structural problems. It also loves adding things that do nothing or unnecessary stuff.
When asked for specifics it fails to deliver and usually the only thing it can do is auto complete after some repetition.
It helps speed up tedious tasks and boiler plate....but it fails to deliver logic. I have also not been able to successfully optimize my code and I am sure it's not fully optimized.
It also fails to build anything larger than a chat bot conceptually. It cannot fathom all the interconnectedness....most programmers can't either. So the prompts are inadequate....
Also.....code is typically around a typical context - ie Domain. So it tends to be information dense and also can be multiple states based on conditions of the situation, whereas the LLM are outputting based on a closed solution. They will typically generalize and cannot provide the necessary insight that would be needed...and how would the programmer know unless they also have the knowledge.....
We are back to TDD now....we need to have all the tests for the AI to be checked against.....
But coding is not language.....lol.
It is written as instructions....but not the same way as language is used. (Coding is performing actions.....the computer does stuff....)
Language like prose and poetry follow grammar that is used to convey ideas.....not perform actions.
You do not speak and have doors open without first developing an entire 'smart system' that alone can only 'open', 'close', 'swing' etc.
But those actions require a physical set of motors, actuators, controllers, a power source, a BIOS, and some kind of training.....then and only with the creative foresight of putting those things together does the word do anything....
Just like software.... It's a massive system and not just some words....
You cannot convert any program to another language.....that's a myth.....
It's based on the physical computer and the underlying instruction set and attached paraphernalia before those instructions mean anything.......
Language is incidental....but its not the primary element.....
Language is for humans.....coding is not language....
No.....you don't seem to understand the difference. Coding is system specific..... constraints based on physical systems. It does not exist alone.
At the same time, language is defined in different structures from code. You could technically define a code for people.....those are imperatives that tend to rely on societal norms and cultural common ground.
For example. Sing the national anthem. Is an instruction, but it requires a system of ideas, but code cannot create the systems.....ideas are self replicating, but code cannot make a chair.....
I meant that your examples have no sense, points in your list, not your points about very limited abilities of ANNs. Sorry.
All your examples are perfectly expectable and predictable for any user with knowledge, so no such user will ever ask them.
As for computer code, it is not just some compilation of patterns reused over and over. To write something sensible programmer should understand context and code itself. ANN could generate working code, but it does not mean this code will work correctly. There are already many articles around about attempts to generate useful code. Even "Hello world" sometimes appear surrealistic, especially for languages rare in training dataset. Worst thing is that ANN easily insert code in another language if required piece of code was not found written in specified language. For something more or less large, say from 1Kl, it is easier and faster to write everything from scratch than to review generated code and fix all nonsense.
There was attemtps to create real code generators in 90s on the basis of expert system with knowledge databases, but all of them was ostracised and declared "bad coding practice".
I see only real use for such ANNs is creating marketing ads content - senseless more or less standard texts and pictures. Or may be few other places where content does not have to have some sense, it just have to exist to attract somebody attention or occupy some area.