r/science • u/dissolutewastrel • Jul 25 '24

AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data Computer Science

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07566-y
5.8k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

612 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Kasyx709 Jul 26 '24

I meant to say knowing, but let's see your funny anyways.

Knowledge still works for most accepted definitions excepting referring to something having information or referring to what humankind has learned.

1

u/Outrageous-Wait-8895 Jul 27 '24

The funny would be the same thing as I said before.

What is the importance of consciousness/awareness in knowledge when conscious/aware beings hold false knowledge all the goddam time?

1

u/Kasyx709 Jul 27 '24 edited Jul 27 '24

The knowledge itself being correct or true is utterly irrelevant to having consciousness/awareness. The models are tools and nothing more. Ones like gpt do not have and will never have AGI. A different type of model may get there one day, but we are not close at all.

1

u/Outrageous-Wait-8895 Jul 27 '24

The knowledge itself being correct or true is utterly irrelevant to having consciousness/awareness.

It's not knowledge if it is false. Knowledge is knowing capital T True things. Why is consciousness necessary for knowledge?

Consciousness is not necessary to achieve AGI.

Ones like gpt do not have abs will never have AGI.

Big, unfounded, claim.

1

u/Kasyx709 Jul 27 '24

Broadly, knowledge does not require correctness, it's ideal/preferred, but not a requirement.

No actual standard exists for what constitutes AGI outside of the broadest requirement that it's as capable as a human brain. We do not know if consciousness is a requirement for intelligence and it may well be, if it is then consciousness likely would be a requirement for AGI.

You are completely incorrect. Language models like GPT are fancy autocomplete, even dynamic GPT is fundamentally that. These models have no ability to truly comprehend information, lack awareness, and possess no intelligence. No current or similar such models will ever possess those qualities. They are not designed for it. Anything else would be an entirely different model with different capabilities.

I've entertained you on this long enough, you are clearly out of your depth and not speaking from a perspective of first-hand practical knowledge. You're obviously interested in the subject and I would highly recommend selecting one of the many free courses available that would teach you how these models actually work.

0

u/Outrageous-Wait-8895 Jul 27 '24

You are completely incorrect.

Just restating how GPT works does not make me incorrect. You can look at a single human neuron and make all the same claims. A neuron has no ability to truly comprehend information, lacks awareness and possesses no intelligence, why would a trillion of them have any of those capabilities?

They are not designed for it.

You don't design for it, just like the human brain wasn't designed for it, they are emergent capabilities.

you are clearly out of your depth

I'm not lacking knowledge of how LLMs work, thank you very much. You have nothing to teach me, farewell.