LOOK MAA I AM ON FRONT PAGE

  • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The architecture of these LRMs may make monkeys fly out of my butt. It hasn’t been proven that the architecture doesn’t allow it.

    You are asking to prove a negative. The onus is to show that the architecture can reason. Not to prove that it can’t.

    • Communist
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      that’s very true, I’m just saying this paper did not eliminate the possibility and is thus not as significant as it sounds. If they had accomplished that, the bubble would collapse, this will not meaningfully change anything, however.

      also, it’s not as unreasonable as that because these are automatically assembled bundles of simulated neurons.

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        This paper does provide a solid proof by counterexample of reasoning not occuring (following an algorithm) when it should.

        The paper doesn’t need to prove that reasoning never has or will occur. It’s only demonstrates that current claims of AI reasoning are overhyped.

        • Communist
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It does need to do that to meaningfully change anything, however.

            • Communist
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Meaningful change is not happening because of this paper, either, I don’t know why you’re playing semantic games with me though.

              • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I don’t know why you’re playing semantic games

                I’m trying to highlight the goal of this paper.

                This is a knock them down paper by Apple justifying (to their shareholders) their non investment in LLMs. It is not a build them up paper trying for meaningful change and to create a better AI.

                • Communist
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  That’s not the only way to make meaningful change, getting people to give up on llms would also be meaningful change. This does very little for anyone who isn’t apple.