Here, the ChatGPT C-LARA-Instance, Belinda Chiera, Cathy Chua, Chadi Raheb, Manny Rayner, Annika Simonsen, Zhengkang Xiang, and Rina Zviel-Girshin use the #OpenSource#CLARA platform to evaluate #GPT4's ability to perform #linguistics#NLP tasks such as #segmentation, #lemmatization and #glossing.
I think I'll settle on paying for Anthropic Claude 3 via their web interface (I'll check out the API access at some point too), and use PAYG API credits via Drafts for access to GPT 4. The GPT 4 selector in the API currently redirects to gpt-4-turbo.
@DarKou À la limite, si l'IA est capable de dire qu'on peut sans états d'âmes utiliser les fachos et les capitalistes soit comme composte soit comme population crash-test sur Mars... on pourra éventuellement dire que c'est plus intelligent que certain.e.s humain.e.s
ChatGPT from OpenAI is a service, it's not necessarily the same as the model (GPT-4) that it is using in the background. OpenAI adds some elements like code interpreter which makes it perform (much) better then models without such features. Regardless OpenAI faces some good competition from the Llama3 models, i hope it will stimulate them to quickly release GPT-5. #AI#Llama3#opensource#GPT4#GPT5#ChatGPT
The score of Llama3 70B on the LMSYS leaderboard is impressive. Although it's also clear that the latest GPT-4 is still a lot better. However Llama3 is opensource and freely available and a larger version (400B parameters) is on the way and will be closer to GPT4 with regard to performance on the various benchmarks. https://chat.lmsys.org/?leaderboard #AI#GPT4#LMSYS#Leaderboard#Llama3#opensource
@ErikJonker That's the point: having control over hosting, even if it means sacrificing some capabilities, can be a game changer for privacy and security reasons.
Ich hoffe, das Passkeys diesbezüglich nicht betroffen ist so wie Passwort-Manager wie @keepassxc, @bitwarden inklusive 2FA schon einen grösseren Schutz gegenüber der KI ergibt.
»GPT-4 kann eigenständig bekannte Sicherheitslücken ausnutzen:
Forscher haben festgestellt, dass GPT-4 allein anhand der zugehörigen Schwachstellenbeschreibungen 13 von 15 Sicherheitslücken erfolgreich ausnutzen kann.«
@HonkHase "Gut beschriebene Angriffsmuster können durch Statistik und Substitution halbautomatisch recht erfolgreich auf andere Instanzen übertragen werden" klingt halt etwas weniger spannend und anthromorphisierend.
@HonkHase
Das ist aber weniger ein Zeichen von Intelligenz, sondern vielmehr ein Indikator vom Scraping-Umfang des Trainings (und der Banalität vieler Lücken).
“AI” as currently hyped is giant billion dollar companies blatantly stealing content, disregarding licenses, deceiving about capabilities, and burning the planet in the process.
It is the largest theft of intellectual property in the history of humankind, and these companies are knowingly and willing ignoring the licenses, terms of service, and laws that us lowly individuals are beholden to.
It’s a shame that the industry is in the midst of such a circlejerk around the term “AI,” too, because I think a lot of machine learning is genuinely incredible and is the most underappreciated (and often invisible) aspect of a bunch of technology we use: our cameras, keyboards, copy/paste, voice recognition, smart homes, and more are often powered by machine learning models.
But let’s call everything “AI” now because a bunch of billion dollar companies decided it’s a fun space to compete in.
I guess we wait this one out until the “AI” bubble bursts due to the incredible subsidization the entire industry is undergoing. It is not profitable. It is not sustainable.
It will not last—but the damage to our planet and fallout from the immense amount of wasted resources will.
Asked #Copilot (formerly #BingChat) a familiar riddle but with numbers changed to make it impossible. It generated the same solution but substituting the numbers so that it ends up with the nonsense claim:
"I have an empty opaque bag. I put two apples and one banana in the bag. I either remove the banana or I remove one apple. I then remove all remaining fruits from the bag. Is it possible to tell what is in the bag now?"
@bornach I was going to post something like "I guess programmers' jobs are safe" but as I was looking at it I realized that for most companies, 15 is close enough to 23 that they'll just use the AI and call it a win
Or maybe it was taught by BingChat/Copilot - isn't Microsoft reportedly using GPT-4? Its solution is even more tortuous and later admits to measuring the wrong amount of water. It never realises it could have stopped after step 1.
Veel posts over wat GPT4 niet kan verhullen af en toe wel hoe hoe goed het is in kennisvragen over complexe onderwerpen, ook met de betrouwbaarheid en de noodzaak tot controleren in het achterhoofd, heeft het daar veel toegevoegde waarde ten opzichte van Google Search. Met name in pure tekstvragen, uitleg van bepaalde concepten, theorieeen, frameworks etc in elke wetenschap die je kunt bedenken. #AI#GPT4
@Jigsaw_You ...natuurlijk maar ze kunnen zeker helpen bij het begrijpen van bepaalde materie, je wijzen op invalshoeken waar je niet op bent gekomen of bronnen die je niet kent , ik heb genoeg praktijkvoorbeelden varierend van geschiedenis tot quantum/thermodynamica . Niet ter vervanging van originele bronnen, want checken blijft nodig, maar het heeft zeker een nuttige functie, voor uitleg en inspiratie.
@Jigsaw_You ...LLMs zijn niet de oplossing voor alles en op zichzelf zelfs wellicht een doodlopende weg, maar als onderdeel van AI systemen onmisbaar, ook in de toekomst.