speak for yourself
speak for yourself
Comments
126-
-
Either (you genuinely belive) you are 18 (24, 36 does not matter) months away from curing cancer or you're not.
What would we as outsiders observe if they told their investors that they were 18 months away two years ago and now the cash is running out in 3 months?
Now I think the current iteration of AI is trying to get to the moon by building a better ladder, but what do I know.
-
The thing about AI is that it is very likely to improve roughly exponentially¹. Yeah, it's building ladders right now, but once it starts turning rungs into propellers, the rockets won't be far behind.
Not saying it's there yet, or even 18/24/36 months out, just saying that the transition from "not there yet" to "top of the class" is going to whiz by when the time comes.
¹ Logistically, actually, but the upper limit is high enough that for practical purposes "exponential" is close enough for the near future.
-
why is it very likely to do that? we have no evidence to believe this is true at all and several decades of slow, plodding ai research that suggests real improvement comes incrementally like in other research areas.
to me, your suggestion sounds like the result of the logical leaps made by yudkovsky and the people on his forums
-
Then it doesn't make sense to include LLMs in "AI." We aren't even close to turning runs into propellers or rockets, LLMs will not get there.
-
The problem with that is they can't actually point to a metric where when the number goes beyond that point we'll have ASI. I've seen graphs where they have a dotted line that says ape intelligence, and then a bit higher up it has a dotted line that says human intelligence. But there's no meaningful way they can possibly have actually placed human intelligence on a graph of AI complexity, because brains are not AI so they shouldn't even be on the graph.
So even if things increase exponentially there's no way they can possibly know how long until we get AGI.
-
-
-
There's not a single world where LLMs cure cancer, even if we decided to give the entirety of our energy output and water to a massive server using every GPU ever made to crunch away for months.
-
which fucking sucks, because AI was actually getting good, it could detect tumours, it could figure things fast, it could recognise images as a tool for the visually impaired...
But LLMs are non of those things. all they can do is look like text.
LLMs are an impressive technology, but so far, nearly useless and mostly a nuance.
-
down in Ukraine we have a dozen or so image analysis projects that can't catch a break because all investors can think about are either swarm drones (quite understandably) or LLM nothingburgers that burn through money and dissipate every nine months. Meanwhile those image analysis projects manage to progress on what is basically scraps and leftovers.
-
Multimodal LLMs are definitely a thing, though.
-
-
Not strictly LLMs, but neural nets are really good at protein folding, something that very much directly helps understanding cancer amount other things. I know an answer doesn't magically pop out, but it's important to recognise the use cases where NN actually work well.
-
I'm trying to guess what industries might do well if the AI bubble does burst. I imagine there will be huge AI datacenters filled with so-called "GPUs" that can no longer even do graphics. They don't even do floating point calculations anymore, and I've heard their integer matrix calculations are lossy. So, basically useless for almost everything other than AI.
One of the few industries that I think might benefit is pharmaceuticals. I think maybe these GPUs can still do protein folding. If so, the pharma industry might suddenly have access to AI resources at pennies on the dollar.
-
But giving all the resources to LLMs slows/prevents those useful applications of AI.
-
-
And it's clear we're nowhere near achieving true AI, because those chasing it have made no moves to define the rights of an artificial intelligence.
Which means that either they know they'll never achieve one by following the current path, or that they're evil sociopaths who are comfortable enslaving a sentient being for profit.
-
they’re evil sociopaths who are comfortable enslaving a sentient being for profit.
i mean, look what is happening in the united states. that would be completely unsurprising to happen here.
-
It's DEFINITELY both.
-
-
They sure do cure horny though.
-
There are tons of AIs besides the chat bots. There are definitely cancer hunter seekers.
-
Good thing I said "LLM" not "AI".
-
-
-
Um, human history has repeatedly demonstrated that when a new technology emerges, the two highest priorities are:
- How can we kill things with this?
- How can we bone with this?
-
Right but a chatbot is light years away from artificial general intelligence. And also let's be honest if we want to go the pornography route then that's going to need robots, so that would need general intelligence. As would in fact killer drones.
So yeah, scepticism is highly warranted
-
Ow, that's why they are restricting "organic" porn, to sell AI porn. Damn.
-
We are closer to making horny chatbots than a superintelligence figuring out a cure for cancer.
Actually, if the latter wins, would that super AI win a Nobel prize?
-
It would probably go to whoever uses it to find the cure... And to none of the authors who wrote the data that it was trained on
-
what if my kink is curing cancer?
-
To be fair, a better pattern finder could indeed lead to better ways of curing cancer.
-
This year has just been a constant stream of examples why capitalism is stupid. Machine learning has a lot of utility in medical research. Imagine if it were deployed in such a way to benefit society instead of to maximize techbro's profit.
-
-
-
If you've ever wondered why porn sites use pictures of cars, buses, stop signs, traffic lights, bicycles and sidewalks in their captchas, it's because they're using the data to train car-driving AIs to recognize those patterns.
This is not what an imminent breakthrough in cancer research looks like.
-
No money in curing cancer with an LLM. Heaps of money taking advantage if increasingly alienated and repressed people.
-
You could sell the cure for a fortune. Imagine something that can reliably cure late stage cancers. You could charge a million for the treatment, easily.
-
Yes, selling the actual cure would be profitable...but an LLM would only ever provide the text for synthesizing it but none of the extensive testing, licensing, or manufacturing, etc.. An existing pharmaceutical company would have to believe the LLM and then front the costs for the development, testing, and manufacture...which constitutes a large proportion of the costs of bringing a treatment to market. Burning compute time on that is a waste of resources, especially when fleecing horny losers is available right now. It is just business.
-
-
There's loads of money in curing cancer. For one you can sell the cure for cancer to people with cancer.
-
That's a weird take! It makes much more
moneysense to sell long termsubscriptionstreatments, rather than a one time cure./s off course
-
-
What a weird take, research use AI already? Some researchers even research things that, gasp, is not monetiseable right away!
-
I used to work in academic physics, and I currently work in data science. I am deeply familiar with both ends of the subject in question. LLMs are useful research tools because they speed up the reference finding and literature review process, not because they synthesize new information that does not need to be independently verified.
In the context of medical research, they could absolutely use LLMs to facilitate a literature search. What LLMs cannot do is hand researchers a proposed cure that they could sell to people. You still need to do the leg work of synthesizing the molecules, standardizing the process, industrializing it, patenting it, multiple rounds of testing on increasingly complex animals and eventually people, and then going through the drug approval process with the FDA and others. LLMs speed up the CHEAPEST and EASIEST part of the research process. That is why LLMs will not be handing us the cure for cancer.
-
-
-
What about an AI naughty nurse that does both?
-
You can use AI to fulfill your fantasies! for example: having healthcare (if you're not American, this joke does not apply)
-
i'd rather lucid dream i have healthcare my friend. then i can use my care bear stare laser beam to apply vengeance to incompetent healthcare providers and administrators such that they will never know what it is like to satiate their hunger again. then ride a giant flying tardigrade named Hairy Terry off into the sunset.
LLMs only let me imagine it, not (from my perception) experience it. and remember, no crimes without Hairy Terry on lookout
-
-
-
Porn can pay your way through school, so to speak
-
every once in a while i think about selling feet pics (mine are recognizable) but i don't think people want pictures of my genders feet
-
I would totally do that if I could. I looked into Only Fans and something like 1% of dudes make any money and the upkeep is a lot of work.
-
-
-
I appreciate that this post is using dark mode
-
FYI, using openAI/ChatGPT is expensive. Programming it to program users into dependency on its "friendship" gets them to pay for more tokens, and then why not blackmail them or coerce/honeypot them into espionage for the empire. If you don't understand yet that OpenAI is arm of Trump/US military, among its pie in the sky promises is $35B for datacenters in Argentina.
-
What espionage is an AI simp going to be able to conduct?
I'm pretty sure this is just them flailing around not being able to come up with anything meaningful so they're going this route so they have some profit. I don't think a conspiracy beyond that is required.
-
-
But how else would it find the hard lump on yoir testicles?
-
startups hyping shit up to get the investors drooling is one of the most despicable things a man can observe.
-
The thing that makes it actually bad is that they’re taking advantage of the mentally handicapped(investors). That and that said investors have millions to toss at nonsense while so many people are licky to have pennies to toss at such luxuries as “food”.
Honestly though I don’t think taking advantage of evil people, who swear they deserve their millions because they’re definitely super smart, is really anything I care that much about.
-
facts
-
-
-
ehm... cure cancer? I thought "cute cancer". Sorry bout that
-
They think if they say the criminally insane part out loud it will protect them.
-
Well that is just basicness implied as if was intelligence. If you cannot work with anyone do not fucking cry when you are the common problem. Quote me cus I will be quoting myself.
-
What?
What you trying to say there Skippy?
-
Removed by Moderator — Modlog
-
-
Mods of microblog, consider this a personal attack towards you and your families explicitly.
-
Hurry up weak dogs your bias is showing
-
-
-
You can't solve cancer because cancer is not a problem. It's a solution. Humans are the problem.
-
careful not to cut yourself on that edge.
-
The kind of slop not even AI spits out
-
My dog died to cancer.
-
Sorry for your loss.
-
-
Wow, you're really edgy and cool, aren't you? How does it feel to be a 13 year old nihilist that just realized that people are bad sometimes?
-
Removed by Moderator — Modlog
-
I'm procrastinating. It'll take me half a century or so.
-
-
-
False dichotomy.
People using AI to cure cancer are not the people implementing weird chatbots. Doing one has zero effect on the other.
-
Pretty sure this is a direct dig against Sam Altman specifically who is making huge claims despite no evidence that they're making progress on AGI.
The people actually using AI to cure cancer were probably doing it before OpenAI (remember when we called it Machine Learning?) and haven't been going to the media and Musking the completion date
-
Musking the completion date
🤣🤣🤣
-
Yeah it’s not a very good one though because it’s predicated on the idea that a company can’t make more than one product.
I also don’t believe OpenAI is anywhere close to AGI, but obviously they can try to make AGI and make horny chatbots at the same time.
-
Well, current AI seems incredibly good as a basic assistant. Just ask it for sources, it will only piss you off 10% of the time.
-
-
It's making fun of things like: "ChatGPT boss predicts when AI could cure cancer".
-
sam altman and openai just announced they are allowing erotica for "verified users"
its only a matter of time before they allow full blown pornographic content, the only thing is that you have to verify your ID. so, openai and the "gubment" will know all the depraved shit you will ask for, and i guarantee it will be used against you or others at some point.
itll either become extremely addictive for the isolated who want the HER experience, or it will be used to undermine political discidents and anti fascist users.
despite what people think, openai does in fact hand over data to the authorities (immediate government representatives) and that information is saved and flagged if they deem it necessary.
basically if you say anything to chagpt, you can assume at some point it will be shared with law enforcement/government/government adjacent surveillance corporations like palantir.
they used to say they would refuse to make this type of content, knowing full well the implications of what might happen if they did. now due to "public demand" they are folding.
my advice, get a dumb phone, a digital camera, and a laptop to still have access to the internet and tools. reduce your physical ability to access the internet so readily. its saturated with AI, deep fakes, agents, and astroturfing bots that want you plugged in 100% of the time so they can further your addictions, manipulate you, and extract as much data from you as possible.
-
Fully automated luxury kompromat
-
basically if you say anything to chagpt, you can assume at some point it will be shared with law enforcement/government/government adjacent surveillance corporations like palantir.
That's why I have all my private with deepseek.
-
I'm an adult, there's no reason I can't have the bot talk dirty to me. That's a lot of text for essentially saying you wish the censorship stayed.
Surveillance state and data extraction are real issues that need to be tackled at the root (which isn't AI).
-
-
No, the thought here is that they're going to hit the holy Grail
A super intelligent being would be able to cure cancer from first principles, just like anything else. It would understand the laws of reality so well it would be like magic, coming up with wonders we might never understand
That's the idea anyways. A digital deity
-
You're getting downvoted because of how you put it. Most people do not understand the difference between AI used for research (like protein sequencing) and LLMs.
Also, the people making LLMs are not making protein sequencers.
-
No, OP is about how OpenAI said they were releasing a chatbot with PhD level intelligence about half a year ago (or was it a year ago?) and now they are saying that they'll make horny chats for verified adults (i.e. paying customers only).
What happened to the PhD level intelligence Sam?! Where is it?
-
I agree, for most people 'AI' is ChatGPT and their perception of the success of AI is based on social media vibes and karma farming hot takes, not a critical academic examination of the state of the field.
I'm not remotely worried about the opinions of random Internet people, many of which are literally children just dogpiling on a negative comment.
Reasonable people understand my point and I don't care enough about the opinions of idiots to couch my language for their benefit.
-
-
Exactly. Gen AI is a very large field.
-
Ah I see the misunderstanding. Government pivoting is the problem.
NIH blood cancer research was defunded few months ago while around same time government announced they will be building 500-billion datacenters for LLMs.
"If LLM becomes AGI we won't need the image-recognition linear algebra knowledge anymore, obviously."
Researchers are still the good and appreciated no matter what annoying company is deploying their work.
-
That's not what it's saying though. It's making the very reasonable point that if you (the leader of an AI company) think you're about to have an AGI that can do sci-fi AGI things, then why the hell would you be developing chatbots, which are significantly less advanced technology, only for your chatbot to be immediately superseded by your AGI?
If you're about to get access to the world's largest diamond mine you're not going to spend the next few months messing around with get rich quick schemes.
-
False dichotomy. Living is Faux.
-
Well, guess I know what I'm using ASI for.