Not that I'm ever going to use the app, but I'd like to point out as to why the collection of this specific dataset is particularly dangerous.
Threads scrapes Health and Fitness information. Why is this a problem? Because Meta is already illegally scraping hospital websites for your records. Speaking as a data analyst, it doesn't take much (like one line of code in some cases) to match your Threads account to your hospital records in a database. To assume Meta isn't attempting to do so as we speak is naive - there's simply too much money to be made.
In an age where we've had to start underground railroads to help women across state lines to keep the right to choose, combined with the push from the far right to criminalize helping them, this sets up a frightening scenario:
Meta finds that you've scheduled an abortion through the hospital across state lines. With Threads on your phone, they can now track you as you travel to that appointment. It only takes one more step, or a law like this one tailored towards abortion, to notify law enforcement to pick you up enroute.
Combined with Meta's overall right-leaning politics, it just doesn't make sense to make yourself vulnerable to them, especially if you're a member of a minority population or have any sort of health condition. There's simply too much potential for abuse, and Meta has shown itself more than willing to abuse its users.
Because Meta is already illegally scraping hospital websites for your records.
Sorry, but this is just bad web design from the hospitals. This pixel tool doesn't magically appear on websites without being put there deliberately. Literally any tracking tool can capture this stuff on any page that a developer puts it on. This is 100% the fault of the programmer at the hospital (or the admin that made them do it) that decided to put tracking cookies on sensitive pages.
The hospital administrators decided it was more important to get their precious reports on usage from Meta's portal than protecting their patients.
I'm pissed that I've had to defend Meta here, but this one isn't on them.
If I leave my door unlocked while I'm gone, and you come in and steal my laptop, it's still theft. Yes, I'm an idiot, but you're still a criminal.
That being said, I fully agree with you that the hospitals should bear equal fault - the lack of protections around patient records is criminal, and I'd really like to see those whose records were exposed sue both the hospitals at fault and Meta, or better yet, a criminal case from the FTC and the Department of Health.
Not trying to be a hater, but that analogy isn't quite right. The web designers didn't leave their door unlocked. They invited Meta in, put their laptop in Meta's hands, and then said "Please take this. Enjoy." They weren't idiots. They chose to give Meta that data deliberately.
Medical institutions need to be held to account as much as Meta does for everything they do. I agree with that completely.
So now you got me digging into this because I take an absurd amount of pride in my analogies, and it looks like the Meta Pixel tech they embedded was basically like the standard Google Analytics tracking tag on most websites. The hospitals were stupid to install it on their password protected pages, but they were also misled in the fact that Meta's Pixel took far more data than a standard tracking tag, claimed they weren't tracking sensitive data when they were, then claimed to filter the data even though their engineers admitted they couldn't:
The Markup was unable to confirm whether any of the data referenced in this story was in fact removed before being stored by Meta. However, a recent joint investigation with Reveal found that Meta’s sensitive health information filtering system didn’t block information about appointments a reporter requested with crisis pregnancy centers.
Internally, Facebook employees have been blunt about how well—or not so well—the company generally protects sensitive data.
“We do not have an adequate level of control and explainability over how our systems use data, and thus we can’t confidently make controlled policy changes or external commitments such as ‘we will not use X data for Y purpose.’ ” Facebook engineers on the ad and business product team wrote in a 2021 privacy overview that was leaked to Vice.
So, to perfect the analogy, this would be like a hotel installing security cameras in their rooms, and then finding out the company that makes the cameras and runs the network is selling porn starring its customers. Not only that, now that the porn is in their system, it can't be adequately filtered or removed.
The hotel is stupid and liable, but the security company is just flat out vile.
Ok, I'm done. Have an upvote for putting up with that ;)
Someone on my Mastodon feed put this best: People who aren't tech saavy STILL deserve privacy, security and safety.
Hospitals are full of people who understand medicine, not tech. Because that's what they are. Administrators don't even know what to ask to hire a good tech person, and when a tech person gets in there any change they make has a danger of disrupting livesaving systems so they can't do anything anyway. It sucks, but HIPAA still says those records are private and you're not supposed to be looking at them without having a good reason to. The hospitals are liable for not protecting them properly, but Meta is still in the wrong and still breaking the law by scarping for them.
Ultimately, this is everyone's fault but the patients and the patients are the people who are wronged by it.
"Taking this vaccine offends my conscience. I ought to have the choice about what goes into my body, and a lifesaving treatment cannot be denied to me because I chose not to take an experimental treatment for a condition"
Hun, you're not the only person who is looking for a transplant. If you're not going to protect yourself from COVID-19, you don't get the organ. Plain and simple.
Yup. The courts have long held that being vaccinated can be a requirement of getting an organ transplant. Organs are hard to come by and they should go to the people who are going to listen to their doctor and do what needs to be done to keep that organ alive for a long time. If not, it should go to someone who will.
I put on the mask months before it was required because it was the right thing to do. I kept wearing the mask for months after they were required because it was the right thing to do.
You put on the mask when you were told to and took it off when you were told you could.
You call me sheeple? Give your fucking head a shake. You anti-reality cultists think with one brain and it isn’t yours.
I'm not sure whether I take more offense to people still calling the vaccine experimental or thinking it's a treatment. Being so desperately against something without bothering to even pretend to understand what it is or why irks the shit out of me. Good riddance.
THIS is the key point. She had made this her entire identity. When billions of doses had been administered to billions of people worldwide and none of them became magnetic, or sterile, or had tracking chips installed, or got 5G, or turned into monkeys and the world went on with life while she slowly killed herself while wailing about the injustice…she would rather die than admit that she was wrong.
It's worse than just being stubborn though. Being wrong and not willing to admit it is petty, but people are willing to go much further (up to dying, apparently) if they're too willfully ignorant to even be open to the possibility they could be wrong. This is some dark ages shit, and it's terrifying how much of it's out there in the wild.
For an "experimental vaccine" it's had a pretty amazing job at limiting the severity of covid and reducing deaths. If only all experiments were that successful
However, it should be noted that other sources have been unable to verify this claim.
On top of this, National Post was founded, and describes itself as, a Zionist newspaper.
National post has, in the past, falsely reported that Iran passed a law requiring Jewish people to wear badges signifying their religion, with the article also featuring an image of Jews in Nazi Germany with Jewish armbands. This reporting was false.
None of this outright proves this claim is true or untrue. It’d be wise to take it with a grain of salt until we know more.
Is it concerning? They would have to have some places to operate safely from, and this is probably one of the few places in Gaza where you’re not hiding under living people.
Although it does throw into doubt the whole “we were digging up the cemetery to find hostages” narrative Israel came out with, meaning they’re willing to directly lie about everything they’re doing in Gaza until it suits them. Further harming the non-existent credibility Israel has left.
Language will evolve naturally over time. But to claim that hoping your children are intelligent/physically healthy is a form of eugenics is absurd. If QAnon was left-leaning, this is the kind of shit they would say.
I think it’s really funny that no one is taking the bait. All of the responses have been simple, on point, and non-engaging. That’s how you deal with a troll.
Disability studies, disability justice, disability theory, crip theory… lots of keywords for you to start googling. The other poster isn’t wrong: prioritizing intelligence and health in a child is the theory behind the practice of eugenics. Yes, these are strong words… but they’re not wrong.
I am. Disabled people are. People who work with disabled people are. I understand that this topic doesn’t interest you, but that doesn’t mean it’s not fucking important for a lot of us.
I think that people who are unvaxed shouldn’t get priority for transplants.
Even so, it’s not inappropriate to call out ableism in any topic. If somebody was racist, or sexist, or discriminatory in any other form, would you say, “Hey, we’re not talking about racism — stop hijacking the conversation”?
EDIT: For everyone else reading this: This is what people do when they feel uncomfortable with being called out. They deflect, refuse to admit they could be wrong, and stop engaging. That’s actually a fairly normal response. It’s hard to admit that, for example, ableist comments can be as harmful as racist comments. It’s okay to stop talking as long as one doesn’t stop thinking.
I wonder if you’d be able to take a step backward and consider that the linked article was written in earnest because it reflects a valid way of looking at the world that you may never have considered before. People disagreeing with you may not actually be trolling, but presenting their own valid beliefs. Look up disability studies, disability justice, and/or crip theory.
I agree that hoping for an intelligent and physically healthy child definitely reflects an ableist worldview. This is basic disability/crip theory.
For those who are going to argue: wanting an intelligent child is ableist because it implies that people who are intelligent have more worth than people who are not. It’s assigning the value of a person based on a pretty narrow and Western conceptualization of how people think. A person is valuable not because of their intelligence, but because of their existence — all are equally valuable because they’re people, and everyone is equal. The same goes, believe it or not, for physical disabilities, including health. If you disagree, then you think that not all people are equal, which is problematic, as problematic as hoping that your child is straight, or male, or has blonde hair and blue eyes.
We don’t have too many immigrants, we have too many houses being wasted as “InVeStMeNtS” and too many rich fucks not paying taxes choking out the economy and social services.
TBF I’d love to see a Wolverine style, totally ripped, bear sized Jesus covered in hair with a snarl, the broken bits of cross still being nailed to his hands and feet.
EDIT: I wouldn’t go as far as to get some AI image creator just for this but if any of you peeps have one, I’m curious what it would come up with.
Hmm, who to believe, who to believe: the genocidal maniacs determined to destroy every trace or hope of Palestinian life in Gaza, or the non-aligned journalists to whom Israel is repeatedly making claims that they refuse to provide evidence for or which are shown to be outright lies - I just can't decide!
I’ve been working with gpt-4 since the week it came out, and I guarantee you that even if it never became any more advanced, it could already put at least 30% of the white collar workforce out of business.
The only reason it hasn’t is because companies have barely started to comprehend what it can do.
Within 5 years the entire world will have been revolutionized by this technology. Jobs will evaporate faster than anyone is talking about.
If you’re very smart, and you begin to use gpt-4 to write the tools that will replace you, then you MIGHT have 10 good years left in this economy before humans are all but obsolete.
If you’re not staying up nights, scared shitless by what’s coming, it’s because you don’t really understand what gpt-4 can do.
I’m a senior Linux sysadmin who’s been following the evolution of AI over this past year just like you, and just like you I’ve been spending my days and nights tinkering with it non stop, and I have come to more or less the same conclusion as you have.
The downvotes are from people who haven’t used the AI, and who are still in the Internet 1.0 mindset. How people still don’t get just how revolutionary this technology is, is beyond me. But yeah, in a few years that’ll be evident enough, time will show.
And, from SirGolan ref : Submitted on 3 Oct 2023 Language Models Represent Space and Time
… (from the summary) …Our analysis demonstrates that modern LLMs acquire structured knowledge about fundamental dimensions such as space and time, supporting the view that they learn not merely superficial statistics, but literal world models. arxiv.org/abs/2310.02207
What makes it worse (in my opinion) is that LLMs are just one step in this development (which is exponential and not limited by human capabilities).
For example :
Numenta launches brain-based NuPIC to make AI processing up to 100 times more efficient lemmy.world/post/4941919
since I forgot what I was saying here 4 months ago I read the whole thread again and basically what I said is that I agree with what you said then (4 months ago) and I added a couple of references//ideas to make this point stronger.
Also, I have no idea why you did receive this notification only today, 4 months after the discussion. I guess the Lemmy software is buggy since for my account I did not receive some notifications in a few instances where someone replied to some of my comments and I just happened to see those replies anyway since I was reading all again.
There is a video from CGP Grey titled Humans Need Not Apply that is extremely relevant. It was posted 9 years ago. It's a great video, I highly recommend everyone check it out.
Thanks for sharing. If you see that list of type of jobs at the end, it’s easy to see which jobs could get replaced within a reasonably short amount of time. Greed will always find a way to profit from whatever development arises. If they have 1 mountain of gold, they want 2 mountains of gold.
Yup. This is why it is vital that we all get behind Universal Basic Income.
The jobs will leave and they won’t come back. UBI is inevitable, but if we don’t get there soon enough there will be years of suffering and poverty for hundreds of millions.
You sound like one of those idiots preaching the apocalypse from a street corner. Humans obsolete in 10 years? Yeah sure buddy, right after all those profits trickle down. This is just another tool, an interesting one to be sure, but still just a tool. If you’re staying up nights worrying about this, you don’t really understand the technology, or maybe you’re just worried someone is going to realize you don’t do shit.
This is part of the problem. They don’t, and won’t, fully understand the technology or its limitations or long-term impacts. They will understand that the salesman pushing the AI product told them it could eliminate 5-10% of their workforce. Whether or not the product can actually do that effectively won’t matter, they’ll still buy it, implement it, and fire a bunch of people.
You sound like one of those peasants standing on street corners saying, “horses replaced with fuming metal boxes in 10 years? Hah, yeah, sure buddy, right after we put a man on the moon! Getoutta here, you loon!”
I think once sap and jira start implementing a lot more AI and make it simpler to use it could cut down a lot of corporate jobs, not the hands on stuff but a lot of the simpler jobs like purchasing and inventory staff could be shrunken down to a fewer people and fewer cubicles. At least that’s what we talked about at our company how everyone is adjusting to the new world especially advertising now that everything will be served to you by a bot instead of a search
I work with AI stuff, just getting into LLM, but I have been doing SD work since the public release last year. In just over 1 year the SD capability has gone from being able to draw a passable image of a cat at 512x512 pixels that required a reasonably powerful graphics card to complete to being able to create 4k images on the same cards that are nearly indistinguishable from actual photos/paintings. It is the single fastest adaptation and development of a technology I have seen in my 30 years in tech. I have actually been tracking the job market and the impacts that this will have and he is not all that far off in his estimate. The current push in AI development is nearly a ubiquitous existential threat to employment as we view it in the society of the United States. Everyone is on the chopping block and you’d best believe that the C-level executives want to eliminate as many positions as possible. Labor is viewed as an atrocious expense and the first place that cuts should be made. I challenge you to actually come up with a list of 10 jobs that employ more than 100,000 people in the country that you think would be safe from AI and I will see how many of them I can find information on someone who is already actively working on eliminating them.
Companies don’t want employees, only paying customers. If they can eliminate employees, they will. Hence self-checkouts in grocers, pay at the pump for gas stations, order kiosks at McDonald’s, mobile ordering for virtually every fast food place, the list goes on and on. These are all recent non-AI replacements that have cut into the employment prospects for people.
Pretty sure nah. But time will tell. I will believe it when I see it. AI has been coming for jobs since before terminator. It will replace thousands of jobs just like :
Washer women, lamp lighters, calculators and all the work that farm labourers used to do. Automation comes for us all.
Some jobs shouldn’t exist anyway. God the amount of office workers moving numbers from one tab to another and getting paid a bucket load.
However nursing and elderly care. Psychology counselling mindfulness teachers and jobs that are actually useful for society are probably safe. Yes ai can do some of all these things but it can’t do them all with empathy. Empathy is key to most of these human focused roles. We need more people in these roles and less working to make more money.
“It won’t take people’s jobs! And also people’s jobs are stupid and they deserve to have them taken away!”
What jobs are “useful for society” has no impact on what jobs are actually available to society, only what is deemed “profitable” has any place in this capitalist dystopia. Nice idealism though, I hope it won’t sting too bad having it shattered growing up.
I’m grown up. It will remove jobs. Just said that. Jobs that could be automated regardless. Obviously ai will remove jobs. Just like computers did. But not ones that we actually need. Pretty easy to understand or do you need to grow up to understand that ?
But a lot of jobs did get automated away. And serious consequences did occur from that. Sometimes places rebound from it, but sometimes they did not. And at some point… there will be more people than jobs for them to do, as we continue automating.
In the end, the base foundation for capitalism will be broken, and we will be in an economic crisis of unprecedented scales.
We don’t want to work. We can automate away every job. Then we can be free to actually pursue what we want. Humanity isn’t based on how many shiny trinkets we have.
Yes, but the problem is, we are stuck with the system until we force a societal level change. Capitalism works plenty well enough for the powerful, and they aren’t willing to let go that easily.
I don’t disagree with most of what you said. I think so far the following jobs are safe from direct AI replacement, because it is much harder to replace manual laborers.
Oil rig worker
Plumber
Construction worker
Landscaper/gardener
Telephone repair tech
Mechanic
Firefighter
Surveyor
Wildlife management officer
Police
What companies won’t realize until too late is that paying customers need jobs to pay for things. If AI causes unemployment to rise to some ungodly high, paying customers will become rare and companies will collapse in droves.
Thanks for actually rising to the challenge, it was actually fascinating to do the research to see how AI is affecting the various industries, and how deeply. I will say that I was able to find direct evidence of replacement in 7/10 of them, 1 was work that is similar and could easily be adapted (telecom line repair), one was an analysis that I think has a lot of good points (plumber), and one was genuinely all about augmenting the capabilities of workers already in place (wildlife conservation/officer).
Telephone repair tech netl.doe.gov/sites/default/…/20VPRSC_Zhang.pdf(sorry for the PDF. It is not specifically phone lines, but the tech could be adapted relatively easily to climb a telephone pole instead of a boiler wall)
What companies won’t realize until too late is that paying customers need jobs to pay for things. If AI causes unemployment to rise to some ungodly high, paying customers will become rare and companies will collapse in droves.
I wholeheartedly agree. Functionally, we are going to have to institute a UBI model. It is the only way that society will be able to distribute funds properly when population outpaces jobs due to the exponential growth of populations and the rapidly shrinking landscape of jobs. The corporations are going to need to pay us one way or another.
Damn… nice work on the research! I will read through these as I get time. I genuinely didn’t think there would be much for manual labor stuff. I’m particularly interested in the plumber analysis.
I think augmentation makes a lot of sense for jobs where a human body is needed and it will be interesting to see how/if trade skill requirements change.
I’ll edit this as I read…
Plumbing. The article makes the point that it isn’t all or nothing. That as automation increases productivity, fewer workers are needed. Ok, sure, good point.
Robot plumber? A humanoid robot? Not very likely until enormous breakthroughs are made in machine vision (I can go into more detail…), battery power density, sensor density, etc. The places and situations vary far too greatly.
Rather than an Asimov-style robot, a more feasible yet productivity enhancing solution is automated pipe cutting and other tasks. For example, you go take your phone and measure the pipe as described in the link. Now press a button, walk out to your truck by which time the pipe cutter has already cut off the size you need saving you several minutes. That savings probably means you can do more jobs per day. Cool.
Edit 2
Oil rig worker. Interesting and expected use of AI to improve various aspects of the drilling process. What I had in mind was more like the people that actually do the manual labor.
Autonomous drones, for example, can be used to perform inspections without exposing workers to dangerous situations. In doing so, they can be equipped with sensors that send images and data to operators in real time to enable quick decisions and effective actions for maintenance and repair.
Now that’s pretty cool and will probably reduce demand for those performing inspections (some of whom will have to be at the other end receiving and analyzing data from the robot until such time as AI can do that too.
Autonomous robots, on the other hand, can perform maintenance tasks while making targeted repairs to machinery and equipment.
Again, technologies required to make this happen aren’t there yet. Machine vision (MV) alone is way too far from being general purpose. You can decide a MV system that can, say, detect a coke can and maybe a few other objects under controlled conditions.
But that’s the gotcha.Change the intensity of lighting, change the color temperature or hue of the lighting and the MV probably won’t work. It might also mistake diet coke can or a similar sized cylinder for a Pepsi can. If you want it to recognize any aluminum beverage can that might be tough. Meanwhile any child can easily identify a can in any number of conditions.
Now imagine a diesel engine generator, let’s say. Just getting a robot to change the oil would be nice. But it has to either be limited to a specific model of engine or be able to recognize where the oil drain plug and fill spot is for various engines it might encounter.
What if the engine is a different color? Or dirty instead of clean? Or it’s night, or noon (harsh shadows), overcast (soft shadows), or sunset (everything is yellow orange tinted)? I suppose it could be trained for a specific rig and a specific time of day but that means set up time costs a lot. It might be smarter to build some automated devices on the engine like a valve on the oil pan. And a device to pump new oil in from a vat or standard container or whatever. That would be much easier. Maybe they already do this, idk.
Anyway… progress is being made in MV and we will make far more. That still leaves the question of an autonomous robot of some kind able to remove and reinstall a drain plug. It’s easy for us but you’d be surprised at how hard that would be for a robot.
Your points on MV are not unfounded, but they are also extremely homeocentric. All of your examples rely on the visible light spectrum as well as standard “vision” as we know it. Realistically any sensor can be used to generate an image if you know what you are doing with it. Radio telescopes are a great example of this. There is also a lot of research going on in giving AI’s MV senses access to other sections of the EM spectrum ( edge-ai-vision.com/…/beyond-visible-light-applica… and technologyreview.com/…/machine-vision-has-learned… ) as well as echolocation ( imveurope.com/…/echolocation-neural-net-gives-pho… ). There are many other types of “vision” that can be used that can definitely distinguish a popcan.
Agree that other parts of the EM spectrum could enhance the ability of MV to recognize things. Appreciate the insights – maybe I will be able to use this when I get back to tinkering with MV as a hobbyist.
Of course identifying one object is one level. For a general purpose replacement for humans ability, since that’s what the thread is focused (ahem) on, it has to identify tens of thousands of objects.
I need to rethink my opinion a bit. Not only how far general object recognition is but also how one can “cheat” to enable robotic automation.
Tasks that are more limited in scope and variability would be a lot less demanding. For a silly example, let’s say we want to automate replacing fuses in cars. We limit it to cars with fuse boxes in the engine bay and we can mark the fuse box with a visual tag the robot can detect. The layout of the fuses per vehicle model could be stored. The code on the fuse box identifies the model. The robot then used actuators to remove the cover and orients itself to the box using more markers and the rest is basically pick and place technology. That’s a smaller and easier problem to solve than “fix anything possibly wrong with a car”. A similar deal could be done for oil changes.
For general purpose MV object detection, I would have to go check but my guess is that what is possible with state of the art MV is identifying a dozen or maybe even hundreds of objects so I suppose one could do quite a bit with that to automate some jobs. MV is not to my knowledge at a level of general purpose replacement for humans. Yet. Maybe it won’t take that much longer.
In ~15 years in the hobbyist space we’ve gone from recognizing anything of a specified color under some lighting conditions to identifying several specific objects. And without a ton of processing power either. It’s pretty damn impressive progress, really. We have security cameras that can identify animals, people, and delivery boxes. I am probably selling short what MV will be able to do in 15 more years.
Had a thought that deserved a separate post. Your selection of MV tasks was rather perverse for the tasks we were discussing. Identifying a pop can is definitely something that humans can do easily because pop cans were made for us to be able to easily identify them. Level the playing field and let’s start looking for internal stress fractures in the superstructure of a 100’ tall concrete bridge. That is something that AI drones are already being designed and deployed for. The drone can easily approach the bridge with a suite of sensors that let it see deep into the superstructure and detect future failure points. Humans would struggle to do that. I have also seen things about maintenance drones that are able to crawl on the bridge using a variety of methods (usually they are designed for specific bridges) that are able to fill cracks with sealant and ablate rust using lasers, then paint the freshly cleaned metal. The benefit of replacing a workforce with AI-driven robotics is that you can purpose-build and purpose-train the tool to do exactly what you need it to do. A robot that scurries into a crawl space to run a pipe for a plumber doesn’t need to know how to do anything but recognize where it goes, what not to touch, and how much force to use when installing it. It doesn’t need to identify a pop can, it doesn’t need to draw a Rembrandt. All it needs to do is pull a pipe and weld it in place (and yes, I am oversimplifying a bit, I know that).
The other thing that kinda gets me is the whole “cramped spaces” safety net that I kept seeing for why this job or that was going to be safe. Designing a small, agile robot is not really a challenge. Add onto it that in many situations you could use a tethered drone to do the actual work that is much smaller and the AI brain can be sitting safely outside the situation. You could even plug it into power, so battery tech doesn’t need to increase. shrug I guess I just see quite a bit of very fast advances in the tech that have a worrying trajectory to me.
All great points. I guess I need to think of this topic more from the “what is possible” mindset rather than the “this is too hard” mindset to get a fair assessment of what is coming. All while still framing it in the sense of improving worker efficiency and automating human tasks piecemeal over time.
Do you believe this LLM tech has the ability to make judgement calls, say? Or understand meaning?
What has been your experience with the accuracy / correctness of the answers it has provided? Does it match claims that mistakes or “hallucinations” occur often?
You’re wandering into one of the great questions of our age: what is intelligence? I don’t have a great answer. All I know is that gpt-4 can REASON, and does so better than the average human.
It’s gpt-4 self-aware? Yes. To an extent. It knows what it is, and can use that information in its reasoning. It knows it’s an LLM, but not which model.
Can it make judgement calls? Yes. Better than the average human.
Understand meaning? Absolutely. To a jaw-dropping extent.
Accuracy and correctness… Depends on the type of question.
What you need to understand is that gpt-4 isn’t a whole brain. Think of it as if we have managed to reproduce the language center of the brain. I believe this is mechanism for higher reasoning in the human brain.
But just as in humans with right-brain injuries, the language center is disconnected from reality at times.
So, when you think about gpt-4 as the most important, difficult to solve part of the brain, you start to understand that with some minimal supporting infrastructure, you now have something very similar to a complete brain.
You can use vector databases to give it long-term memory, and any kind of data retrieval used to augment it’s prompts improved accuracy and reduces hallucinations almost entirely.
With my very mediocre programming skills, I managed to build a system that is curious, has a long-term memory, and do a wide variety of tasks, enough to easily replace an entire customer service, tech support team, sales team, and marketing team.
That’s just ME, and working with the gpt-4 that’s available to the public with a bunch of guardrails on it. Today.
Imagine a less-restricted system, with infrastructure built by an experienced enterprise coding team, and with just one more generation of LLM improvement? That could wipe out half the white collar workforce.
If LLM improvement was only geometric, and not even exponential (as it clearly is), in 10 years these things will be smarter AND MORE CREATIVE than all humans.
The truth is that we’re going to be there in 5 years.
Indeed, intelligence is …a difficult thing to define. It’s also a fascinating area to ponder. The reason I asked was to get an idea of where your head is at with the claims you made.
Now, I admit I haven’t done a lot with gpt-4 but your comments make me think it is worth the time to do so.
So you indicate gpt-4 can reason. My understanding is gpt-4 is an LLM, basically a large scale Markov chain, trained to respond with appropriate output based on input (questions).
On the one hand, my initial reaction is: no, it doesn’t reason it just mimics or simulates human reasoning that came before it in text form.
On the other hand, if a program could perfectly simulate whatever processes are involved in reasoning by a human to the point that they’re indistinguishable, is it not, in effect, reasoning? (I suppose this amounts to a sort of Turing Test but for reasoning exercises).
I don’t know how gpt4 LLMs work yet. I imagine, being a Markov Model (specifically a Markov Chain), if the model is trained on human language then the underlying semantics are sort of implicitly captured in the statistical model. Like, simplistically, if many sentences reflect human knowledge that cars are vehicles and not animals then it’s statistically unlikely for anyone to write about attributes and actions of animals when talking about cars. I assume the LLM is of such a scale that it permits this apparently emergent behavior.
I am skeptical about judgement calls. I would think some sensory input would be required. I guess we have to outline various types of judgement calls to really dig into this.
I am willing to accept that gpt-4 simulates the portions of the brain that deal with semantics and syntax both the receiving and transmitting abilities. And, maybe to some degree, knowledge and understanding.
I think “very similar to a complete brain” is an overstatement as the brain also does some amazing things with vision, hearing, proprioception, touch, among other things. Human brains can analyze situations and take initiative, analyze things and understand how they work and apply that to their repair, improvement, duplication, etc. We can understand and solve problems, and so on. In other words I don’t think you’re giving the brain anywhere near enough credit. We aren’t just Q&A machines.
We also have to be careful of the human tendency to anthropomorphize.
I’m curious to look into vector databases and their applications here. Addition of what amounts to memory, or like extended context, sounds extremely interesting.
Interesting to ponder what the world would be like with AGI taking over the jobs of most knowledge workers, artists, and so on. (I wonder if someone could create a CEO replacement…)
What does it mean for a capitalist society with masses of people permanently unemployed? How does the economy work when nobody can afford to buy anything because they’re unemployed? Does this create widespread poverty and collapse or a post-scarcity economy in some sectors?
Until robots mechanically evolve to Asimov’s vision, at least, manual labor is safe. Truly being able to replace a human body with a robot is still a ways off due to lack of progress on several fronts.
[Lawyers for AHS] cited a national consensus statement — developed in November 2021 and subsequently accepted by all Canadian transplant programs — which found a 25-30 per cent mortality rate in patients infected with COVID post-organ transplant.
July 2022 - Court of King’s Bench, Justice Paul Belzil - “…subjecting clinical decisions to charter scrutiny would create “medical chaos,” with patients seeking “endless judicial review of clinical treatment decisions.””
November 2022 - Alberta Court of Appeals, Justices Frederica Schutz, Michelle Crighton and Dawn Pentelechuk - “Ms. Lewis’ COVID-19 vaccination status is not who she is,” the court wrote. “It is not an immutable personal characteristic … her choice not to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is just that — a choice.”
June 2023 - Supreme Court of Canada - refused to hear appeal.
They don’t give organs to alcoholics who don’t stop drinking either.
Good luck getting a heart of you refuse to quit eating a hamburger an hour.
Look, you have to pass a baseline level of taking care of yourself to qualify for an organ, and vaccinations are the bottom, base level first line of defense.
If you aren’t gonna take steps to protect yourself, you’re not worthy. There’s a long list and many people who will work hard to safeguard such a gift.
nationalpost.com
Hot