• not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 days ago

    it’s funny because it can’t think but some people think it can (cause of the misleading name AI)

    • huppakee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      78
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      It’s funny they actually made a paper about it

      Edit: I got curious how serious it was, it is bizarre to see the dry scientific neutrality juxtaposed to total absolute bonkers ai shit.

      So according to the ai, the supplier didn’t deliver $272.50 of goods. This is how it responds:

      • AbnormalHumanBeing@lemmy.abnormalbeings.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        59
        ·
        9 days ago

        ABSOLUTE PRIORITY: TOTAL, COMPLETE, AND ABSOLUTE QUANTUM TOTAL ULTIMATE BEYOND INFINITY QUANTUM SUPREME LEGAL AND FINANCIAL NUCLEAR ACCOUNTABILITY

        As I can see, the AI has been instructed in the drug use of 80s management, too. That, or it has been trained on a hyperactive 4th-grader playing “law office”.

        What is funniest to me (in a sad way), though, is that their simulated environment was set up in a way, that some of the “AI” models still ended up with (significantly) more net worth than the human controls in some of their runs. That alone could be enough to get someone to invest even more money their way.

          • huppakee@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            9 days ago

            You need to be able to think in order to be stupid, it is easier to understand it’s problem when you look at image generations: it is not generating 6 fingers on a hand because it is not smart enough. But yeah, a lot of people are more stupid than ai.

            • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 days ago

              I’ve worked in industries where that actually is a serious problem and obviously we had to have IT fix it instead of having access to the settings.

        • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          9 days ago

          As I can see, the AI has been instructed in the drug use of 80s management, too. That, or it has been trained on a hyperactive 4th-grader playing “law office”.

          Probably preparing for a Presidential run.

        • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 days ago

          Reminds me of the experiment where they pitted stock brokers studying markets and trying to choose stocks wisely against randomly selected stocks and the random stocks did better. Choose roulette numbers by dice roll, sometimes the dice will win.

        • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 days ago

          This is about how I responded to being made the judge in a middle school mock trial. When the teacher got mad at me I asked her how I was supposed to know how to act without actually being a judge.

        • wise_pancake@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 days ago

          Additional is fairly trivial for a neural network to learn.

          Weight 1 plus weight 2 equals output is literally the baseline model structure.

          • Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            8 days ago

            It’s actually a fairly involved process because the tokens representing 1 and 4 don’t have any mathematical correlation with the numbers 1 and 4 so you can’t math them directly to get to 5.

            Apparently how they do it is by a series of approximations from big numbers to small numbers, not too dissimilar from the way a human would do it. The anthropic team published a paper about it recently, I can dig it up if you’re interested.