@pallenberg
So verschiebt man den Diskurs. Eine vollkommen aus dem Ruder gelaufene Idee präsentieren und darauf warten das alle anderen eine Mittelposition einnehmen. Diese " neue Mitte" ist dann der neue Ankerpunkt. Diskussion erfolgreich Richtung überwachung verschoben.
@pallenberg es geht um Diskurs Verschiebung keine Ahnung was daran verschwörungstheorie ist. Es ist auch keine Aussage drin wer was weiß.
Am Ende wird Microsoft irgendwo ein stückchen zurück rudern und es als Einsicht verkaufen.
Auch wenn du die Auffassung nicht teilst geht deine Antwort an meinem Kommentar vorbei.
> I find my feelings about #AI are actually pretty similar to my feelings about #blockchains: they do a poor job of much of what people try to do with them, they can't do the things their creators claim they one day might, and many of the things they are well suited to do may not be altogether that beneficial. And while I do think that AI tools are more broadly useful than blockchains, they also come with similarly monstrous costs.
@cstross@pluralistic@molly0xfff from what I have seen companies that make GenAI invest in GenAI example Google -> Anthropic.
Investor === Investee
Eg.
They pump up each other's values.
It's the GPT-3.5 version, which is prone to all sorts of mistakes and hallucinations - further strengthening the pattern where most people form their impressions of what this stuff can and can't be useful for through access to the weaker models
@simon I seen charts that say gpt 4 isn't much more accurate than gpt3.5 . fits my impression.
Blaming GPT3.5 on why people are not convinced by LLM's they call AI is not convincing me.
@simon oh vendor performance information...
These benchmarks and their data are also in the training data. LLM generally perform worse with alternative formulations of the questions in the benchmarks. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.19450.pdf
GPT4 is the best, but size does not justify the cost/size. GPT3.5 now The "vanilla LLM".
It's the defined normal and a standard you can talk about.
@simon
GPT 4 is just not that much better than GPT3.5, also in a hallucination benchmark, which I don't have at hand.
It just not justifies the cost for anyone but MS. It's not worth it for OpenAI, the customers and companies.
Maybe your experience with GPT3.5 is extraordinarily bad, but works for anyone else. 🤷
I played it through. I started with GPT 2. It's better but has still the same flaws.
I have to look at this for work but it's pointless with the existing expectations.
tangential to but inspired by the OP: I think the way we address the Masto Reply Guy Infestation is make an absolutely clear shared reality that the replies are the Thunderdome and the best way not to get rocked is not to enter https://mastodon.social/@lzg/112128990197661962
@danilo What is the point of social media if replys are bad? Isn't that the whole point of social Media? Communicating with people?
Maybe one way communication is better like a blog where you can't reply?
@danilo I have read this reply guy thing before but I don't get it. You don't know what is good or not before you know/read it.
Wasn't that one of the "Internet phenomena" in the first place? Why masto reply guys? What is the difference to message board people from the 90s that annoy you?
@danilo aaaahh they do replys to themself. Thanks .Interesting ... So they use the attention on other posts to put their mega thread into it. Sounds a bit like chatgpt is writing the answers. I have noticed that only one time here....