Is it confusing or are you just so locked in on your special interest that you are ignoring the context? I made a comment about a future CPC AI that I have imagined for fun, someone responded to inform me about how LLMs work, which isn’t what I was talking about, I responded saying of course that is true, then elaborated the idea they had misunderstood in my original comment.
You even left out the part where I clarified that LLMs as they stand are a part of paving the way towards the idea I brought up. If something like what I have imagined for kicks is ever made, LLMs will certainly be a part of its development.
I’m sure I could have been more concise but considering you used the word “gaslighting” to describe what you feel my comment was, it seems like you just reaching heavily for the outcomes you seek
Yet others are not reading it that way, so maybe there are multiple people who are just skimming over what I said to find what they want to go in on.
I appreciate you clarifying your original comment.
Or do you rather mean that the insights obtained while developing LLMs can help us towards those better machine learning applications?
Yes, exactly this. I don’t think the future technology we have both fantasized about is just a beefed up chat gpt, but that the field of machine learning as a whole will advance and LLMs are a part of that process.
I definitely understand where you are coming from, although I do think there is a Luddite-esque angle that attempts to reject “AI” as bad because of the LLM hype and the negative uses pushed by capitalists. “AI” is already putting people out of work and being used in a lot of industries, some of which (like medicine) are actually really promising, and others are pretty terrible.
Either way, ending capitalism is the only way to ensure that there is any future where the technology is a net positive.
I do think that with the rate of climate collapse, there’s a good chance we won’t see it reach the point of being advanced enough to be liberating.
Is it confusing or are you just so locked in on your special interest that you are ignoring the context? I made a comment about a future CPC AI that I have imagined for fun, someone responded to inform me about how LLMs work, which isn’t what I was talking about, I responded saying of course that is true, then elaborated the idea they had misunderstood in my original comment.
You even left out the part where I clarified that LLMs as they stand are a part of paving the way towards the idea I brought up. If something like what I have imagined for kicks is ever made, LLMs will certainly be a part of its development.
I’m sure I could have been more concise but considering you used the word “gaslighting” to describe what you feel my comment was, it seems like you just reaching heavily for the outcomes you seek
deleted by creator
Yet others are not reading it that way, so maybe there are multiple people who are just skimming over what I said to find what they want to go in on.
I appreciate you clarifying your original comment.
Yes, exactly this. I don’t think the future technology we have both fantasized about is just a beefed up chat gpt, but that the field of machine learning as a whole will advance and LLMs are a part of that process.
deleted by creator
Thanks for apologizing.
I definitely understand where you are coming from, although I do think there is a Luddite-esque angle that attempts to reject “AI” as bad because of the LLM hype and the negative uses pushed by capitalists. “AI” is already putting people out of work and being used in a lot of industries, some of which (like medicine) are actually really promising, and others are pretty terrible.
Either way, ending capitalism is the only way to ensure that there is any future where the technology is a net positive.
I do think that with the rate of climate collapse, there’s a good chance we won’t see it reach the point of being advanced enough to be liberating.