93
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Assian_Candor@hexbear.net 19 points 6 days ago

Hey america

Nice AI "superiority"

It would be a shame if someone were to... Challenge it...

some-controversy

[-] ChaosMaterialist@hexbear.net 9 points 6 days ago

There's so many Chinese scientists and Chinese institutions on the research papers only a biden-horror ✨ doofus ✨ trump-anguish would think the sanctions would work.

[-] AvocadoVapelung@hexbear.net 55 points 1 week ago
[-] culpritus@hexbear.net 62 points 1 week ago

A second Chinese AI has hit the western hype bubble.

[-] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 1 points 4 days ago
[-] culpritus@hexbear.net 1 points 4 days ago

I can't tell from a few simple searches, but both of the latest announcements for DeepSeek and Doubao (link above) appear to have occurred on Jan 20th. A coordinated attack on capital seemingly.

[-] peppersky@hexbear.net 31 points 1 week ago

These things suck and will literally destroy the world and the human spirit from the inside out no matter who makes them

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 31 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I think this kind of statement needs to be more elaborate to have proper discussions about it.

LLMs can really be summarized as “squeezing the entire internet into a black box that can be queried at will”. It has many use cases but even more potential for misuse.

All forms of AI (artificial intelligence in the literal sense) as we know it (i.e., not artificial general intelligence or AGI) are just statistical models that do not have the capacity to think, have no ability to reason and cannot critically evaluate or verify a certain piece of information, which can equally come from legitimate source or some random Reddit post (the infamous case of Google AI telling you to put glue on your pizza can be traced back to a Reddit joke post).

These LLM models are built by training on the entire internet’s datasets using a transformer architecture that has very good memory retention, and more recently, with reinforcement learning with human input to reduce their tendency to produce incorrect output (i.e. hallucinations). Even then, these dataset require extensive tweaking and curation and OpenAI famously employ Kenyan workers at less than $2 per hour to perform the tedious work of dataset annotation used for training.

Are they useful if you just need to pull up a piece of information that is not critical in the real world? Yes. Is it useful if you don’t want to do your homework and just let the algorithm solve everything for you? Yes (of course, there is an entire discussion about future engineers/doctors who are “trained” by relying on these AI models and then go on to do real things in the real world without developing the capacity to think/evaluate for themselves). Would you ever trust it if your life depends on it (i.e. building a car, plane or a house, or treating an illness)? Hell no.

A simple test case is to ask yourself if you would ever trust an AI model over a trained physician to treat your illness? A human physician has access to real-world experience that an AI will never have (no matter how much medical literature it can devour on the internet), has the capacity to think and reason and thus the ability to respond to anomalies which have never been seen before.

An AI model needs thousands of images to learn the difference between a cat and a dog, a human child can learn that with just a few examples. Without a huge input dataset (helped annotated by an army of underpaid Kenyan workers), the accuracy is simply crap. The fundamental process of learning is very different between the two, and until we have made advances on AGI (which is as far as you could get from the current iterations of AI), we’ll always have to deal with the potential misuses of AI in our lives.

[-] SkingradGuard@hexbear.net 17 points 1 week ago

are just statistical models that do not have the capacity to think, have no ability to reason and cannot critically evaluate or verify a certain piece of information, which can equally come from legitimate source or some random Reddit post

I really hate how techbros have convinced people that it's something magical. But all they've done is convinced themselves and everyone else that every tool is a hammer

[-] Lovely_sombrero@hexbear.net 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yes, LLMs are stupid and they steal your creative creations. There is some real room for machine learning (something that has been just all combined into "AI" now for some reason), like Nvidia's DLSS technology for example. Or other fields where the computer has to operate in a closed environment with very strictly defined parameters, like pharmaceutical research. How proteins fold is strictly governed by laws of physics and we can tell the model exactly what those laws are.

But it is funny how all the hundreds of billions $$$ invested into LLMs in the West, along with big government support and all the "smartest minds" working on it, they got beaten by the much smaller and cheaper Chinese competitors, who are ACTUALLY opensourcing their models. US tech morons got owned on their own terms.

[-] sewer_rat_420@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago

Even LLMs have some decent uses, but you put the finger on what I am feeling, that all of AI and machine learning is being overshadowed by these massive investments into LLMs, just because a few ghouls sniff profit

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 22 points 1 week ago

that's a deeply reactionary take

load more comments (57 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 28 points 1 week ago
[-] makotech222@hexbear.net 22 points 1 week ago

how do you measure performance of an llm? ask it how many 'r's there are in 'strawberry' and how many times you have to say 'no thats wrong' until it gets 3

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 27 points 1 week ago

Basically speed and power usage to process a query. Also, there's been tangible progress in doing reasoning with unsupervised learning seen in DeepSeek R1 and approaches such as neurosymbolics. These types of models can actually explain the steps they take to arrive at the answer, and you can correct them.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Dyno@hexbear.net 22 points 1 week ago

it requires fewer tons of CO2 to tell you that 757 * 128 = 3042

[-] peppersky@hexbear.net 17 points 1 week ago

They use synthetic AI generated benchmarks

It's computer silicon blowing itself basically

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] abc@hexbear.net 15 points 1 week ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
93 points (100.0% liked)

technology

23495 readers
252 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS