• Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Will increasing the model actually help? Right now we’re dealing with LLMs that literally have the entire internet as a model. It is difficult to increase that.

    Making a better way to process said model would be a much more substantive achievement. So that when particular details are needed it’s not just random chance that it gets it right.

    • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      That is literally a complete misinterpretation of how models work.

      You don’t “have the Internet as a model”, you train a model using large amounts of data. That does not mean, that this model contains any of the actual data. State of the at models are somewhere in the billions of parameters. If you have, say, 50b parameters, each being a 64bit/8 byte double (which is way, way too much accuracy) you get something like 400gb of data. That’s a lot, but the Internet slightly larger than that.

      • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        It’s an exaggeration, but its not far off given that Google literally has all of the web parsed at least once a day.

        Reddit just sold off AI harvesting rights on all of its content to Google.

        The problem is no longer model size. The problem is interpretation.

        You can ask almost everyone on earth a simple deterministic math problem and you’ll get the right answer almost all of the time because they understand the principles behind it.

        Until you can show deterministic understanding in AI, you have a glorified chat bot.

        • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          7 months ago

          It is far off. It’s like saying you have the entire knowledge of all physics because you skimmed a textbook once.

          Interpretation is also a problem that can be solved, current models do understand quite a lot of nuance, subtext and implicit context.

          But you’re moving the goal post here. We started at “don’t get better, at a plateau” and now you’re aiming for perfection.

          • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            You’re building beautiful straw men. They’re lies, but great job.

            I said originally that we need to improve the interpretation of the model by AI, not just have even bigger models that will invariably have the same flaw as they do now.

            Deterministic reliability is the end goal of that.

            • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              Will increasing the model actually help? Right now we’re dealing with LLMs that literally have the entire internet as a model. It is difficult to increase that.

              Making a better way to process said model would be a much more substantive achievement. So that when particular details are needed it’s not just random chance that it gets it right.

              Where exactly did you write anything about interpretation? Getting “details right” by processing faster? I would hardly call that “interpretation” that’s just being wrong faster.