▲ 825 ▼ ChatGPT 'got absolutely wrecked' by Atari 2600 in beginner's chess match — OpenAI's newest model bamboozled by 1970s logic (www.tomshardware.com) submitted 1 year ago by Lifecoach5000@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 201 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] FMT99@lemmy.world 287 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (59 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 59 child comments replies: [–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 228 points 1 year ago (28 children) AI including ChatGPT is being marketed as super awesome at everything, which is why that and similar AI is being forced into absolutely everything and being sold as a replacement for people. Something marketed as AGI should be treated as AGI when proving it isn't AGI. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 28 child comments replies: [–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (13 children) Not to help the AI companies, but why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? It's obvious they're shit at it, why do they answer anyway? It's because they're programmed by know-it-all programmers, isn't it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago (1 child) Because they’re fucking terrible at designing tools to solve problems, they are obviously less and less good at pretending this is an omnitool that can do everything with perfect coherency (and if it isn’t working right it’s because you’re not believing or paying hard enough) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] MrJgyFly@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago Or they keep telling you that you just have to wait it out. It’s going to get better and better! permalink fedilink source parent [–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 year ago why don't they program them AI models aren't programmed traditionally. They're generated by machine learning. Essentially the model is given test prompts and then given a rating on its answer. The model's calculations will be adjusted so that its answer to the test prompt will be closer to the expected answer. You repeat this a few billion times with a few billion prompts and you will have generated a model that scores very high on all test prompts. Then someone asks it how many R's are in strawberry and it gets the wrong answer. The only way to fix this is to add that as a test prompt and redo the machine learning process which takes an enormous amount of time and computational power each time it's done, only for people to once again quickly find some kind of prompt it doesn't answer well. There are already AI models that play chess incredibly well. Using machine learning to solve a complexe problem isn't the issue. It's trying to get one model to be good at absolutely everything. permalink fedilink source parent [–] PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago ...or a simple counter to count the r in strawberry. Because that's more difficult than one might think and they are starting to do this now. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago Because the LLMs are now being used to vibe code themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] four@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago I think they're trying to do that. But AI can still fail at that lol permalink fedilink source parent [–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) If you pay for chatgpt you can connect it with wolfrenalpha and it's relays the maths to it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago I don't pay for ChatGPT and just used the Wolfram GPT. They made the custom GPTs non-paid at some point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 4 points 1 year ago This is where MCP comes in. It's a protocol for LLMs to call standard tools. Basically the LLM would figure out the tool to use from the context, then figure out the order of parameters from those the MCP server says is available, send the JSON, and parse the response. permalink fedilink source parent [–] veroxii@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago They are starting to do this. Most new models support function calling and can generate code to come up with math answers etc permalink fedilink source parent [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? Because the AI doesn't know what it's being asked, it's just a algorithm guessing what the next word in a reply is. It has no understanding of what the words mean. "Why doesn't the man in the Chinese room just use a calculator for math questions?" permalink fedilink source parent [–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago From a technology standpoint, nothing is stopping them. From a business standpoint: hubris. To put time and effort into creating traditional logic based algorithms to compensate for this generic math model would be to admit what mathematicians and scientists have known for centuries. That models are good at finding patterns but they do not explain why a relationship exists (if it exists at all). The technology is fundamentally flawed for the use cases that OpenAI is trying to claim it can be used in, and programming around it would be to acknowledge that. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? They will, when it makes sense for what the AI is designed to do. For example, ChatGPT can outsource image generation to an AI dedicated to that. It also used to calculate math using python for me, but that doesn't seem to happen anymore, probably due to security issues with letting the AI run arbitrary python code. ChatGPT however was not designed to play chess, so I don't see why OpenAI should invest resources into connecting it to a chess API. I think especially since adding custom GPTs, adding this kind of stuff has become kind of unnecessary for base ChatGPT. If you want a chess engine, get a GPT which implements a Stockfish API (there seem to be several GPTs that do). For math, get the Wolfram GPT which uses Wolfram Alpha's API, or a different powerful math GPT. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (14 replies) [–] suburban_hillbilly@lemmy.ml 30 points 1 year ago (2 children) Most people do. It's just called AI in the media everywhere and marketing works. I think online folks forget that something as simple as getting a Lemmy account by yourself puts you into the top quintile of tech literacy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Yet even on Lemmy people can't seem to make sense of these terms and are saying things like "LLM's are not AI" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] malwieder@feddit.org 28 points 1 year ago (5 children) Google Maps doesn't pretend to be good at chess. ChatGPT does. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] whaleross@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (4 children) A toddler can pretend to be good at chess but anybody with reasonable expectations knows that they are not. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] MelodiousFunk@startrek.website 20 points 1 year ago (3 children) Plot twist: the toddler has a multi-year marketing push worth tens if not hundreds of millions, which convinced a lot of people who don't know the first thing about chess that it really is very impressive, and all those chess-types are just jealous. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Have you tried feeding the toddler gallons of baby-food? Maybe then it can play chess permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) They’ve been feeding the toddler everybody else’s baby food and claiming they have the right to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago "If we have to ask every time before stealing a little baby food, our morbidly obese toddler cannot survive" permalink fedilink source parent [–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 child) well so much hype has been generated around chatgpt being close to AGI that now it makes sense to ask questions like "can chatgpt prove the Riemann hypothesis" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] Broken@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (3 children) I agree with your general statement, but in theory since all ChatGPT does is regurgitate information back and a lot of chess is memorization of historical games and types, it might actually perform well. No, it can't think, but it can remember everything so at some point that might tip the results in it's favor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Eagle0110@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) Regurgitating an impression of, not regurgitating verbatim, that's the problem here. Chess is 100% deterministic, so it falls flat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] raltoid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* I'm guessing it's not even hard to get it to "confidently" violate the rules. permalink fedilink source parent [+] FMT99@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago (2 children) I think that’s generally the point is most people thing chat GPT is this sentient thing that knows everything and… no. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Do they though? No one I talked to, not my coworkers that use it for work, not my friends, not my 72 year old mother think they are sentient. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 year ago Okay I maybe exaggerated a bit, but a lot of people think it actually knows things, or is actually smart. Which… it’s not… at all. It’s just pattern recognition. Which was I assume the point of showing it can’t even beat the goddamn Atari because it cannot think or reason, it’s all just copy pasta and pattern recognition. permalink fedilink source parent [–] adhdplantdev@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (2 children) Articles like this are good because it exposes the flaws with the ai and that it can't be trusted with complex multi step tasks. Helps people see that think AI is close to a human that its not and its missing critical functionality permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FMT99@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 5 points 1 year ago (1 child) You're not wrong, but keep in mind ChatGPT advocates, including the company itself are referring to it as AI, including in marketing. They're saying it's a complete, self-learning, constantly-evolving Artificial Intelligence that has been improving itself since release... And it loses to a 4KB video game program from 1979 that can only "think" 2 moves ahead. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] FMT99@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] x00z@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) In all fairness. Machine learning in chess engines is actually pretty strong. AlphaZero was developed by the artificial intelligence and research company DeepMind, which was acquired by Google. It is a computer program that reached a virtually unthinkable level of play using only reinforcement learning and self-play in order to train its neural networks. In other words, it was only given the rules of the game and then played against itself many millions of times (44 million games in the first nine hours, according to DeepMind). https://www.chess.com/terms/alphazero-chess-engine permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jeeva@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago Sure, but machine learning like that is very different to how LLMs are trained and their output. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] merdaverse@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child) OpenAI has been talking about AGI for years, implying that they are getting closer to it with their products. https://openai.com/index/planning-for-agi-and-beyond/ https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/ Not to even mention all the hype created by the techbros around it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] saltesc@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago I like referring to LLMs as VI (Virtual Intelligence from Mass Effect) since they merely give the impression of intelligence but are little more than search engines. In the end all one is doing is displaying expected results based on a popularity algorithm. However they do this inconsistently due to bad data in and limited caching. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago I mean, open AI seem to forget it isn’t. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 228 points 1 year ago (28 children) AI including ChatGPT is being marketed as super awesome at everything, which is why that and similar AI is being forced into absolutely everything and being sold as a replacement for people. Something marketed as AGI should be treated as AGI when proving it isn't AGI. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 28 child comments replies: [–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (13 children) Not to help the AI companies, but why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? It's obvious they're shit at it, why do they answer anyway? It's because they're programmed by know-it-all programmers, isn't it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago (1 child) Because they’re fucking terrible at designing tools to solve problems, they are obviously less and less good at pretending this is an omnitool that can do everything with perfect coherency (and if it isn’t working right it’s because you’re not believing or paying hard enough) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] MrJgyFly@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago Or they keep telling you that you just have to wait it out. It’s going to get better and better! permalink fedilink source parent [–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 year ago why don't they program them AI models aren't programmed traditionally. They're generated by machine learning. Essentially the model is given test prompts and then given a rating on its answer. The model's calculations will be adjusted so that its answer to the test prompt will be closer to the expected answer. You repeat this a few billion times with a few billion prompts and you will have generated a model that scores very high on all test prompts. Then someone asks it how many R's are in strawberry and it gets the wrong answer. The only way to fix this is to add that as a test prompt and redo the machine learning process which takes an enormous amount of time and computational power each time it's done, only for people to once again quickly find some kind of prompt it doesn't answer well. There are already AI models that play chess incredibly well. Using machine learning to solve a complexe problem isn't the issue. It's trying to get one model to be good at absolutely everything. permalink fedilink source parent [–] PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago ...or a simple counter to count the r in strawberry. Because that's more difficult than one might think and they are starting to do this now. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago Because the LLMs are now being used to vibe code themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] four@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago I think they're trying to do that. But AI can still fail at that lol permalink fedilink source parent [–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) If you pay for chatgpt you can connect it with wolfrenalpha and it's relays the maths to it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago I don't pay for ChatGPT and just used the Wolfram GPT. They made the custom GPTs non-paid at some point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 4 points 1 year ago This is where MCP comes in. It's a protocol for LLMs to call standard tools. Basically the LLM would figure out the tool to use from the context, then figure out the order of parameters from those the MCP server says is available, send the JSON, and parse the response. permalink fedilink source parent [–] veroxii@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago They are starting to do this. Most new models support function calling and can generate code to come up with math answers etc permalink fedilink source parent [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? Because the AI doesn't know what it's being asked, it's just a algorithm guessing what the next word in a reply is. It has no understanding of what the words mean. "Why doesn't the man in the Chinese room just use a calculator for math questions?" permalink fedilink source parent [–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago From a technology standpoint, nothing is stopping them. From a business standpoint: hubris. To put time and effort into creating traditional logic based algorithms to compensate for this generic math model would be to admit what mathematicians and scientists have known for centuries. That models are good at finding patterns but they do not explain why a relationship exists (if it exists at all). The technology is fundamentally flawed for the use cases that OpenAI is trying to claim it can be used in, and programming around it would be to acknowledge that. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? They will, when it makes sense for what the AI is designed to do. For example, ChatGPT can outsource image generation to an AI dedicated to that. It also used to calculate math using python for me, but that doesn't seem to happen anymore, probably due to security issues with letting the AI run arbitrary python code. ChatGPT however was not designed to play chess, so I don't see why OpenAI should invest resources into connecting it to a chess API. I think especially since adding custom GPTs, adding this kind of stuff has become kind of unnecessary for base ChatGPT. If you want a chess engine, get a GPT which implements a Stockfish API (there seem to be several GPTs that do). For math, get the Wolfram GPT which uses Wolfram Alpha's API, or a different powerful math GPT. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (14 replies)
[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (13 children) Not to help the AI companies, but why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? It's obvious they're shit at it, why do they answer anyway? It's because they're programmed by know-it-all programmers, isn't it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago (1 child) Because they’re fucking terrible at designing tools to solve problems, they are obviously less and less good at pretending this is an omnitool that can do everything with perfect coherency (and if it isn’t working right it’s because you’re not believing or paying hard enough) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] MrJgyFly@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago Or they keep telling you that you just have to wait it out. It’s going to get better and better! permalink fedilink source parent [–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 year ago why don't they program them AI models aren't programmed traditionally. They're generated by machine learning. Essentially the model is given test prompts and then given a rating on its answer. The model's calculations will be adjusted so that its answer to the test prompt will be closer to the expected answer. You repeat this a few billion times with a few billion prompts and you will have generated a model that scores very high on all test prompts. Then someone asks it how many R's are in strawberry and it gets the wrong answer. The only way to fix this is to add that as a test prompt and redo the machine learning process which takes an enormous amount of time and computational power each time it's done, only for people to once again quickly find some kind of prompt it doesn't answer well. There are already AI models that play chess incredibly well. Using machine learning to solve a complexe problem isn't the issue. It's trying to get one model to be good at absolutely everything. permalink fedilink source parent [–] PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago ...or a simple counter to count the r in strawberry. Because that's more difficult than one might think and they are starting to do this now. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago Because the LLMs are now being used to vibe code themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] four@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago I think they're trying to do that. But AI can still fail at that lol permalink fedilink source parent [–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) If you pay for chatgpt you can connect it with wolfrenalpha and it's relays the maths to it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago I don't pay for ChatGPT and just used the Wolfram GPT. They made the custom GPTs non-paid at some point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 4 points 1 year ago This is where MCP comes in. It's a protocol for LLMs to call standard tools. Basically the LLM would figure out the tool to use from the context, then figure out the order of parameters from those the MCP server says is available, send the JSON, and parse the response. permalink fedilink source parent [–] veroxii@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago They are starting to do this. Most new models support function calling and can generate code to come up with math answers etc permalink fedilink source parent [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? Because the AI doesn't know what it's being asked, it's just a algorithm guessing what the next word in a reply is. It has no understanding of what the words mean. "Why doesn't the man in the Chinese room just use a calculator for math questions?" permalink fedilink source parent [–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago From a technology standpoint, nothing is stopping them. From a business standpoint: hubris. To put time and effort into creating traditional logic based algorithms to compensate for this generic math model would be to admit what mathematicians and scientists have known for centuries. That models are good at finding patterns but they do not explain why a relationship exists (if it exists at all). The technology is fundamentally flawed for the use cases that OpenAI is trying to claim it can be used in, and programming around it would be to acknowledge that. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? They will, when it makes sense for what the AI is designed to do. For example, ChatGPT can outsource image generation to an AI dedicated to that. It also used to calculate math using python for me, but that doesn't seem to happen anymore, probably due to security issues with letting the AI run arbitrary python code. ChatGPT however was not designed to play chess, so I don't see why OpenAI should invest resources into connecting it to a chess API. I think especially since adding custom GPTs, adding this kind of stuff has become kind of unnecessary for base ChatGPT. If you want a chess engine, get a GPT which implements a Stockfish API (there seem to be several GPTs that do). For math, get the Wolfram GPT which uses Wolfram Alpha's API, or a different powerful math GPT. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago (1 child) Because they’re fucking terrible at designing tools to solve problems, they are obviously less and less good at pretending this is an omnitool that can do everything with perfect coherency (and if it isn’t working right it’s because you’re not believing or paying hard enough) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] MrJgyFly@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago Or they keep telling you that you just have to wait it out. It’s going to get better and better! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MrJgyFly@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago Or they keep telling you that you just have to wait it out. It’s going to get better and better! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 year ago why don't they program them AI models aren't programmed traditionally. They're generated by machine learning. Essentially the model is given test prompts and then given a rating on its answer. The model's calculations will be adjusted so that its answer to the test prompt will be closer to the expected answer. You repeat this a few billion times with a few billion prompts and you will have generated a model that scores very high on all test prompts. Then someone asks it how many R's are in strawberry and it gets the wrong answer. The only way to fix this is to add that as a test prompt and redo the machine learning process which takes an enormous amount of time and computational power each time it's done, only for people to once again quickly find some kind of prompt it doesn't answer well. There are already AI models that play chess incredibly well. Using machine learning to solve a complexe problem isn't the issue. It's trying to get one model to be good at absolutely everything. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago ...or a simple counter to count the r in strawberry. Because that's more difficult than one might think and they are starting to do this now. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago Because the LLMs are now being used to vibe code themselves. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] four@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago I think they're trying to do that. But AI can still fail at that lol permalink fedilink source parent
[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) If you pay for chatgpt you can connect it with wolfrenalpha and it's relays the maths to it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago I don't pay for ChatGPT and just used the Wolfram GPT. They made the custom GPTs non-paid at some point. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago I don't pay for ChatGPT and just used the Wolfram GPT. They made the custom GPTs non-paid at some point. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 4 points 1 year ago This is where MCP comes in. It's a protocol for LLMs to call standard tools. Basically the LLM would figure out the tool to use from the context, then figure out the order of parameters from those the MCP server says is available, send the JSON, and parse the response. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago They are starting to do this. Most new models support function calling and can generate code to come up with math answers etc permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? Because the AI doesn't know what it's being asked, it's just a algorithm guessing what the next word in a reply is. It has no understanding of what the words mean. "Why doesn't the man in the Chinese room just use a calculator for math questions?" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago From a technology standpoint, nothing is stopping them. From a business standpoint: hubris. To put time and effort into creating traditional logic based algorithms to compensate for this generic math model would be to admit what mathematicians and scientists have known for centuries. That models are good at finding patterns but they do not explain why a relationship exists (if it exists at all). The technology is fundamentally flawed for the use cases that OpenAI is trying to claim it can be used in, and programming around it would be to acknowledge that. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 point 1 year ago why don't they program them to look up math programs and outsource chess to other programs when they're asked for that stuff? They will, when it makes sense for what the AI is designed to do. For example, ChatGPT can outsource image generation to an AI dedicated to that. It also used to calculate math using python for me, but that doesn't seem to happen anymore, probably due to security issues with letting the AI run arbitrary python code. ChatGPT however was not designed to play chess, so I don't see why OpenAI should invest resources into connecting it to a chess API. I think especially since adding custom GPTs, adding this kind of stuff has become kind of unnecessary for base ChatGPT. If you want a chess engine, get a GPT which implements a Stockfish API (there seem to be several GPTs that do). For math, get the Wolfram GPT which uses Wolfram Alpha's API, or a different powerful math GPT. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] suburban_hillbilly@lemmy.ml 30 points 1 year ago (2 children) Most people do. It's just called AI in the media everywhere and marketing works. I think online folks forget that something as simple as getting a Lemmy account by yourself puts you into the top quintile of tech literacy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Yet even on Lemmy people can't seem to make sense of these terms and are saying things like "LLM's are not AI" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Yet even on Lemmy people can't seem to make sense of these terms and are saying things like "LLM's are not AI" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] malwieder@feddit.org 28 points 1 year ago (5 children) Google Maps doesn't pretend to be good at chess. ChatGPT does. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] whaleross@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (4 children) A toddler can pretend to be good at chess but anybody with reasonable expectations knows that they are not. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] MelodiousFunk@startrek.website 20 points 1 year ago (3 children) Plot twist: the toddler has a multi-year marketing push worth tens if not hundreds of millions, which convinced a lot of people who don't know the first thing about chess that it really is very impressive, and all those chess-types are just jealous. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Have you tried feeding the toddler gallons of baby-food? Maybe then it can play chess permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) They’ve been feeding the toddler everybody else’s baby food and claiming they have the right to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago "If we have to ask every time before stealing a little baby food, our morbidly obese toddler cannot survive" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] whaleross@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (4 children) A toddler can pretend to be good at chess but anybody with reasonable expectations knows that they are not. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] MelodiousFunk@startrek.website 20 points 1 year ago (3 children) Plot twist: the toddler has a multi-year marketing push worth tens if not hundreds of millions, which convinced a lot of people who don't know the first thing about chess that it really is very impressive, and all those chess-types are just jealous. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Have you tried feeding the toddler gallons of baby-food? Maybe then it can play chess permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) They’ve been feeding the toddler everybody else’s baby food and claiming they have the right to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago "If we have to ask every time before stealing a little baby food, our morbidly obese toddler cannot survive" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MelodiousFunk@startrek.website 20 points 1 year ago (3 children) Plot twist: the toddler has a multi-year marketing push worth tens if not hundreds of millions, which convinced a lot of people who don't know the first thing about chess that it really is very impressive, and all those chess-types are just jealous. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Have you tried feeding the toddler gallons of baby-food? Maybe then it can play chess permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) They’ve been feeding the toddler everybody else’s baby food and claiming they have the right to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago "If we have to ask every time before stealing a little baby food, our morbidly obese toddler cannot survive" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Have you tried feeding the toddler gallons of baby-food? Maybe then it can play chess permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) They’ve been feeding the toddler everybody else’s baby food and claiming they have the right to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago "If we have to ask every time before stealing a little baby food, our morbidly obese toddler cannot survive" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) They’ve been feeding the toddler everybody else’s baby food and claiming they have the right to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] xavier666@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago "If we have to ask every time before stealing a little baby food, our morbidly obese toddler cannot survive" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago "If we have to ask every time before stealing a little baby food, our morbidly obese toddler cannot survive" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 child) well so much hype has been generated around chatgpt being close to AGI that now it makes sense to ask questions like "can chatgpt prove the Riemann hypothesis" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Broken@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (3 children) I agree with your general statement, but in theory since all ChatGPT does is regurgitate information back and a lot of chess is memorization of historical games and types, it might actually perform well. No, it can't think, but it can remember everything so at some point that might tip the results in it's favor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Eagle0110@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) Regurgitating an impression of, not regurgitating verbatim, that's the problem here. Chess is 100% deterministic, so it falls flat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] raltoid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* I'm guessing it's not even hard to get it to "confidently" violate the rules. permalink fedilink source parent [+] FMT99@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Eagle0110@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) Regurgitating an impression of, not regurgitating verbatim, that's the problem here. Chess is 100% deterministic, so it falls flat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] raltoid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* I'm guessing it's not even hard to get it to "confidently" violate the rules. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] raltoid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* I'm guessing it's not even hard to get it to "confidently" violate the rules. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] FMT99@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago (2 children) I think that’s generally the point is most people thing chat GPT is this sentient thing that knows everything and… no. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Do they though? No one I talked to, not my coworkers that use it for work, not my friends, not my 72 year old mother think they are sentient. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 year ago Okay I maybe exaggerated a bit, but a lot of people think it actually knows things, or is actually smart. Which… it’s not… at all. It’s just pattern recognition. Which was I assume the point of showing it can’t even beat the goddamn Atari because it cannot think or reason, it’s all just copy pasta and pattern recognition. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Do they though? No one I talked to, not my coworkers that use it for work, not my friends, not my 72 year old mother think they are sentient. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 year ago Okay I maybe exaggerated a bit, but a lot of people think it actually knows things, or is actually smart. Which… it’s not… at all. It’s just pattern recognition. Which was I assume the point of showing it can’t even beat the goddamn Atari because it cannot think or reason, it’s all just copy pasta and pattern recognition. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 year ago Okay I maybe exaggerated a bit, but a lot of people think it actually knows things, or is actually smart. Which… it’s not… at all. It’s just pattern recognition. Which was I assume the point of showing it can’t even beat the goddamn Atari because it cannot think or reason, it’s all just copy pasta and pattern recognition. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] adhdplantdev@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (2 children) Articles like this are good because it exposes the flaws with the ai and that it can't be trusted with complex multi step tasks. Helps people see that think AI is close to a human that its not and its missing critical functionality permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FMT99@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[+] FMT99@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 5 points 1 year ago (1 child) You're not wrong, but keep in mind ChatGPT advocates, including the company itself are referring to it as AI, including in marketing. They're saying it's a complete, self-learning, constantly-evolving Artificial Intelligence that has been improving itself since release... And it loses to a 4KB video game program from 1979 that can only "think" 2 moves ahead. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] FMT99@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] FMT99@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] x00z@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) In all fairness. Machine learning in chess engines is actually pretty strong. AlphaZero was developed by the artificial intelligence and research company DeepMind, which was acquired by Google. It is a computer program that reached a virtually unthinkable level of play using only reinforcement learning and self-play in order to train its neural networks. In other words, it was only given the rules of the game and then played against itself many millions of times (44 million games in the first nine hours, according to DeepMind). https://www.chess.com/terms/alphazero-chess-engine permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jeeva@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago Sure, but machine learning like that is very different to how LLMs are trained and their output. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] jeeva@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago Sure, but machine learning like that is very different to how LLMs are trained and their output. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] merdaverse@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child) OpenAI has been talking about AGI for years, implying that they are getting closer to it with their products. https://openai.com/index/planning-for-agi-and-beyond/ https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/ Not to even mention all the hype created by the techbros around it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago I like referring to LLMs as VI (Virtual Intelligence from Mass Effect) since they merely give the impression of intelligence but are little more than search engines. In the end all one is doing is displaying expected results based on a popularity algorithm. However they do this inconsistently due to bad data in and limited caching. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago I mean, open AI seem to forget it isn’t. permalink fedilink source parent