639
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works 30 points 7 months ago

Except it’s not, because they can’t perfectly recall everything.

It’s more like reading every book in the world, and someone asking you what comes next after “And I…”.

[-] realbadat@programming.dev 36 points 7 months ago

"will alwaaays love you...."

Easy. No other answer.

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 22 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

But the AI isn't "recalling" in the same way you do, it doesn't "remember" what it "read", it "reads" on demand and has instant access to essentially all of the information ~~available online~~ it was trained on (E: though it's becoming more or less the same thing, and is definitely the same when it comes to law books for example), from which it collects the necessary details if and when it needs it.

So yes, it is literally "sat" there with all the books open in front of it, and the ability to pinpoint a bit of information in any one of all the books in milliseconds.

[-] Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works 14 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It doesn’t read on demand, it reads once when it’s being trained, and it later recalls what it learnt from that training.

Training LLMs takes a very long time and a lot of hardware power.

[-] pop@lemmy.ml 17 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

If it doesn't read it on demand, how does it sometimes spill its training data verbatim then?

The trained model shouldn't have that, right? But it does?

https://m.slashdot.org/story/422185

[-] 8uurg@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

These models have so many parameters that, while insufficient to memorize all text it has ever seen, it can end up memorizing some of the content. It is the difference between being able to recall a random passage versus recalling the exact thing you need. Both allow you to spill content verbatim, but one is problematic while the other can be helpful.

There are techniques to allow it it 'read on demand', but they are not part of the core model (i.e. the autocmpletion model / LLM) and are tacked on top of it. For example, you can tie it search engine, which Microsoft's copilot does, and is something which I don't think is enabled for ChatGPT by default. Or allow it to query a external data bank (Retrieval Augmented Generation).

[-] abruptly8951@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Do you read a song on demand when you are singing the lyrics verbatim?

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It doesn’t read on demand

Yes, it does, from the information it was trained on (or - stored), which like you say, requires a lot of hardware power so it can be accessed on demand. It isn't just manifesting the information out of thin air, and it definitely doesn't "remember" in the same way we do (E: even the best photographic memory isn't the same as an indexable one).

[-] abruptly8951@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago

It's definitely not indexed, we use RAG architectures to add indexing to data stores that we want the model to have direct access to, the relevant information is injected directly in the context (prompt). This can somewhat be equated to short term memory

The rest of the information is approximated in the weights of the neural network which gives the model general knowledge and intuition..akin to long term memory

[-] self@awful.systems 14 points 7 months ago

or it can be equated to a shitty database and lossy compression (with artifacts in the form of “hallucinations”), but that doesn’t make the tech sound particularly smart, does it?

but half the posts in your history are in this thread and that’s too many already

[-] Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 months ago

People have such crazy misconceptions about AI. Glad to see someone else knows how it works at least.

[-] self@awful.systems 13 points 7 months ago
[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 10 points 7 months ago

awww, I just got another bowl of popcorn!

but rofl holy shit at "glad to see someone else knows how they work" given the ..... depth of understanding, shall we say? that was demonstrated in this thread

[-] dgerard@awful.systems 15 points 7 months ago

and in conclusion an AI is very like an elephant, particularly the back end

[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I mean you still gotta understand some shit for Ctrl+F to be helpful. If you've ever taken an open book quiz without prior study you'll learn pretty quick that open book does NOT = easy A (depending on the class / prof I guess, but you get the gist).

So, open book Ctrl-F'able bar exam, I could probably get an okay score just on key word matching, not knowing jack shit about law; but it'd be far from a perfect score. Current state of machine learning appears to be in a comparable boat.

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

This is a computer. Time (in this aspect) isn't an issue.

[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 9 points 7 months ago

your post shows a serious lack of comprehension. just because so many of the posters in this thread are idiots didn't mean you have to participate too.

(CPU time extremely counts, and resource-wise with these things it's really quite a lot)

[-] V0ldek@awful.systems 11 points 7 months ago

Steelmanning what this person said, I think the issue is that your ability to CTRL+F through a book during a time-limited exam is not as strong as even a single computer clocked at GHz doing the same thing. You can CTRL+F through a single book in the same time it takes it to CTRL+F through the entire body of knowledge.

this post was submitted on 15 May 2024
639 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1489 readers
30 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS