estevaoam

I agree. The main function of a component should describe what it does, similar to describing the algorithm in natural language. I have been following this pattern with success. It is much easier to understand things at a glance.

Not hotdog

As if one's market value is always coherent with their skills. There are so many variables that plays a role on how much one earns: where you live, negotiation skills, marketing skills, getting competent people to evaluate you properly, micro and macro economics, willingness to deal with bullshit corporate stuff, etc.

Sorry, I didn’t want to sound too sarcastic and negative: I don’t disagree with you. But looking from a broader timescale it is clear that in general we’re speeding up our technological progress in a logarithmic scale.

I have been following closely the NLP field for over a decade and the progress is speeding up. Can it stall? Sure. But everything is pointing out that it won’t.

Surely we can say that about our last 10s years of our human existence.

Why most people are blind to the most important point of those models: the progress is moving at astonishing pace.

IMO it is a useless discussion to debate about the current SOTA or economics. In two years we will certainly have some breakthrough as we have been seen for the past years. And things are speeding up.

edit: typo.

Being honest, I am not that much concerned with what can I do as individual. If sh*t hits the fan we’re going to have to solve this at societal level, not individual.

As others already put out there: if society collapses heavily due to displacement of labour, money won’t matter much.

Unless advanced AIs are used to build weapons for those who own the capital, nothing can hold off angry mobs everywhere.

When we get to the point where human labour in general can be easily automated, that’s when capitalism like we know must be buried. We must find another way to live and prosper on this planet.

I agree. I’m also not happy with that. Hopefully we’re getting more open tools like Stable Diffusion.

Innovation is really a weird thing. If we could show ChatGPT to people 10, 20 years ago I'm certain most people would be amazed by this technology.

Today, lots of people heavily criticize its limitations and thinks 40 bucks/mo is too much for this kind of tech.

Reminds me about newspapers headlines being skeptical when light bulb started being sold for the first time. 99% people seems to be fundamentally conservative and can't grasp innovation properly, nor understand the fast pace of evolution some things can have.

Not saying this is good or bad, just an interesting phenomenon to observe.

I agree with you. I also think it is useful to understand limits. This is not what I’m arguing against, it is affirming limits without the knowledge to do so. Until we don’t really figure out how our intelligence works we can’t say we can’t reproduce it algorithmically.

We can find plenty of examples where engineering advanced beyond our understanding: bridges, boats, tables, etc. When humanity started building those we didn’t have the full picture of our physics yet we build and used those for more than 1000s years.

Again, I’m not saying we can’t engineer something from knowledge, I’m saying we can’t affirm limits onto something we don’t fully understand yet.

IMHO this paper is speculative and biased towards our human intelligence. From all the advances I have seen so far in the AI landscape, I’m growing more and more skeptic that our intelligence is something so complex that we can’t replicate.

Sorry but your argument doesn’t make sense. Engineering/building is different than understanding how things works. Surely is related: if you build something you usually can learn how things work - and vice-versa.

Insane to me is to affirm that something has a limit when you don’t fully understand it.

I find it amusing that so many people is skeptic about general AI, trying to come up with arguments that it will never happen, while at the same time we do not understand how our own intelligence work. Go figure out.

> I do think high frequency rate monitors are a gimmick

Do you mean refresh rate? If yes, I used to think that but couldn’t be more wrong. Nowadays I have a 144hz monitor and I’m considering even going >240hz.

If you have the gear to push that much fps it’s a night day difference.

I agree with you. I don’t understand why some people get annoyed about this. Any desired life change starts with goal setting.

Easy to say “just do what you’re supposed to do” as if that phrase by itself had magic powers. It is known that motivation and habit is a fairly complex process, so I don’t get why we still get such reductionist comments around here.

We need more empathy and less criticism toward others, specially when they’re trying to improve themselves.