[flagged]
Doesn't anyone think the future is unpredictable anymore? Does your life experience not include things tanking an unexpected turn, ever?
I can't believe how many commenters here and elsewhere take the future trajectory of AI for granted. Where are the flying cars, the moon bases, the nuclear powered appliances? Things don't always go up on an exponential curve, and even when they do, results are not always what we thought initially. Isn't this obvious, and rather basic?
Synthetic dataset generation which is actually good (i.e. adds meaningful information by probing a latent space in truly unique ways + very high temperature sampling + including outside feedback for diversity seeding) will solve the "internet is polluted now with LLM outputs" problem
Barring that, mass swarms of AI agents going into the world and retrieving new information, using weak/active learning to mass label, and improving themselves with increasingly less human intervention is INEVITABLE.
The issue with folks like yourselves and frankly most of mainstream ML research today is a failure of imagination. As it turns out, ML/AI Ph.D's seemed to be too busy lying about their models scores on NeurIPS papers to read sci-fi or other speculative fiction which imagines what technological changes will do to society. This a huge risk, as rich people with a lack of moral compass often view works of speculative fiction as blueprints.
Here's a few which imagined just a tiny bit of a world impacted by the exact sorts of AI systems which are moving far faster than we could have ever imagined:
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permutation_City
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jetsons
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_No_Mouth,_and_I_Must_Sc...
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erewhon
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diamond_Age
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_the_World_(1934_film...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_in_the_Shell_(1995_film)
The future is teleological (the academy unjustly treats that word like a slur), and you should listen a bit more to those who fear the AI and warn you about just how wrong you are about the claim that AI "won't go up on an exponential curve"
You think writing "is INEVITABLE" in caps proves something? You think Science Fiction novels prove something about what will happen in the future?
Is this satire? Do you not understand the meaning of the word FICTION?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imitating_art
Yes, fiction turning to reality is inevitable. LLMs by definition create "artificial life" out of art. I repeat, reality is teleological.
AI does have the potential to be a private tutor. Think that scene from Star Trek (2009)[1] or The Young Ladies Illustrated Primer.
Companies are making 11-12 figure bets that AI will be huge, so this comment isn't out of line.
Pretty sure I read that line about self driving cars 8 or 9 years ago.
Realistically, kids will always take the easiest path, why learn when AI will do all the thinking for them? And if AI does all the thinking and people begin to depend on them, what autonomy do these people have left? They've been completely neutered.
The lack of knowledge about this among the general public is (ironically), a failure of the current education system
We're outsourcing our sovereignty to a machine blob in a black box, the blob will do the thinking for all of those children.
edit: for the authoritarian tyrants that they are (mass reflexive downvotes)
Your response is to rely on opaque knowledge agents produced by the largest and shadiest corporations that humanity has ever known. Your lack of paranoia is a severe vulnerability. Good luck.
Not the OP, but throughout human history, being in the upper percentile for intelligence has been an advantage. The safe bet is that LLMs won't change that.
>opaque knowledge agents
By definition this true for every knowledge agent in history. If Person A is ignorant and Person B offers to teach them, there is always (by definition) an asymmetry. Aristotle was an opaque knowledge agent to Alexander.
You're arguing that everyone might be good at sports if they had a personal trainer. How is this not a good thing? If you take these models only by the base value they provide, you might be able to eliminate private tutoring from the equation and make performance of students more comparable.
I am far from happy that these models originate from shady for-profit corporations with dubious incentives, but a state actor could just as well train a model for support in education.
> Your response is to rely on opaque knowledge agents produced by the largest and shadiest corporations that humanity has ever known.
This is ironic. My teachers organized a big week about the importance of the personal carbon footprint when I was still in high school (~2015). The personal carbon footprint is criticized for shifting blame for climate change to personal consumer behavior, rather than corporations and was subject of a big advertising campaign from BP [0].
I think you overestimate the average teacher in terms of their ability to think critically and overall skill in their respective subjects.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_footprint#Shifting_resp...
I have total control over the model, literally dozens of generation parmaters to play with, literally thousands of open source projects like this
https://github.com/Mihaiii/llm_steer or https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1a-aQvKC9avdZpdyBn4j...
which allow me to jailbreak the model to my hearts content - except I didn't need to do that since Mistral isn't actually aligned anyway!
While you're the one relying on "opaque" knowledge agents, I will have DPO'd my open access model with my custom huge debate evidence dataset to be a better competitive debater than any living human on the planet.
Good luck.