1,574 karma · joined April 3, 2019
Whether you should side with Tik Tok or not, the above statement applies to a massive percentage of people who don't agree with the Tik Tok ban. This is dangerous thinking
"Nietzsche In Twelve Minutes"
"It seems obvious from the demos that GPT-3 is capable of reasoning.
But not consistently.
It would be critical, imo, to see if we can identify a pattern of activity in it associated with the lucid responses vs activity when it prodcues nonsense.
If/when we have such a apattern we would need to find a way to enforce it to happen in every interaction"
And people agree:
"Dunno why you are getting downvoted, I agree with you. It seems like to get GPT-3 to do good reasoning you have to convince it that it is writing about a dialogue between two smart people. Talking to Einstein, giving some good examples, etc. all seem to help. Shaping really seems to matter, but I don’t think we have enough access to the hidden state to determine if there are quantitative differences between when it is more lucid and when it isn’t.
It’s like Gwern said: “sampling cannot prove the absence of knowledge, only the presence of it” (because whenever it fails, maybe with a different context, different sampling parameters, using spaces between letters, etc. it would have worked)"
Its interesting that this kind of speculation is entering the conversation. I think we are on the cusp
I dont think we have seen the full impact of this yet. Online dating has been a major catalyst and made things alot worse. I think we are still 10-15, maybe 20 years off before we see people growing older and the toll this type of sexual marketplace takes on their relationships.