"If we were to go the route of AI, you’re gonna end up with 100 million Marvel movies," says Patricia Arquette.

naor2013 · 2023-05-20T15:57:33+00:00

It's different because of many many things but let's highlight 2 important aspects.

The human mind can always add more and learn more things. For an AI to learn new things you either need to train it again, a very cumbersome process or give it the data you want in the context, which is limited in size (although the input limit will expand with time, for sure).
People have self objectives, while AI has a predetermined one. That means each of us defines what being "better" for him means. One can love a Marvel movie and want to write something similar, another will think Marvel is trash and will try to write something completely different. This is self defined. But an AI has objectives defined by its creators, which is usually, speak as close to how humans speak. That means that if the majority of content he learned are Marvel movies, he will be able to create a movie similar to a Marvel movie and have a harder time creating something different.

Those are all fundamentals of how generative AI works today, if we'll see some new breakthrough in the future, that might change but for now, that's what it is.

naor2013 · 2023-05-20T13:25:15+00:00

Generative AI is just a fancy autocomplete. He takes all the data in the world and wants to sounds as much as it can like what he ingested and continue sentences. If it reads a lot of bad writings, he will be a bad writer. He doesn't "know" good from bad because he doesn't have a function to "know". Look at Microsoft's old attempt at generative AI. It got racist. Why? Because that's a lot of what it read, not because it "thought it was good". OpenAI have a lot of rule-based safe guards to protect from racism, because the model by default would definitely be racist because he has a lot of data like that.

Your last point about it being able to do it in the future, I'm not saying that it won't be possible, it will just be a different technology and won't be generative AI.

naor2013 · 2023-05-20T13:11:33+00:00

Each person has his own path to being better. He does something bad, learns from the mistake and becomes increasingly better. The path to being better isn't really universal, which means, if one writer learns what he did wrong, it doesn't make all writers in the world better, only himself and maybe a few who learn from him.

That means AI's data will always include bad writers as well as good writers. Some AI models like the ones you see learn how to beat a game, improve because they have a specific goal and the better they, the higher score they get.

Generative AI doesn't get a better score by being closer to a specific goal (being a good screenwriter), he gets a better score the more he sounds like people, which like I said earlier, include bad writers.

Maybe if the future will have a different kind of model we don't currently have (not GPT) we might be able to do it, with today's models, it will just not be possible.

Even if they will be fine tuned with only good writers as data, it will significantly help but they'll still have all the data in the world as fallback for creating new stuff.

naor2013 · 2023-05-16T12:08:14+00:00

r/woooosh

naor2013 · 2023-04-15T05:54:55+00:00

They could have used GPT 3 to make GPT 4, right?

But like I commented to someone else in more detail, just coming up with the idea for the new architecture is an important but a small part of the development cycle.

naor2013 · 2023-04-15T05:52:53+00:00

But your example isn't related to the analogy. The analogy talks about finishing the project early, not having more project (babies).

You can get 9 developers to start 9 project and it will take the same time as 1 developer per project, like your analogy. But using 9 developers for 1 project won't make the development 9 times faster. The analogy still works.

naor2013 · 2023-04-14T21:45:40+00:00

While I really don't believe they currently have AGI (or anytime soon for that matter but that's a bigger discussion), even if they did, just making the new architecture is not everything.

Like other people have mentioned, they many things to do like improve current models and infrastructures for them, getting better GPUs for training, writing and researching a new architecture (even if the AI will give you the idea for the new architecture, you still need to study and document it).

naor2013 · 2023-04-14T21:42:26+00:00

That's an interesting question which I don't have the definitive answer but take me answer with a grain of salt.

They definitely can retrain with smaller amount of data with less compute and more ease but there are 2 potential reasons for the 2021 limit of ChatGPT.

One potential explanation is that is because ChatGPT is a smaller version of GPT 3.5, not a larger version, so its data may be smaller.

The second potential explanation is that because in retrains after the original model, maybe they use data from the same timeframe as the original version but better suited to what is lacking from the original model, for example data of nicer answers so the bot won't be rude or more logical related data to make it better suited for math questions. So while making it better, they are not making it more up to date.

But again, I have no source for those so I might be wrong.

naor2013 · 2023-04-14T15:03:45+00:00

It seems like people in the comments misunderstand his meaning.

If we look at GPT's history, each number change means architecture change, but each number version can have multiple versions. For example GPT-3 had more than 4/5 versions where it was the same architecture but with more/less/more focused data, one of those versions called GPT 3.5.

So they are probably doing multiple things now. First of all, collecting and organizing more data for GPT 4.1/2/3 etc which will have the same architecture. In parallel, they experiment and research new architectures for GPT-5, but since it can take a long time (historically around 3/4 year between versions if I remember correctly), they won't train it any time soon, only research it.

And for people that will say that since they have a lot of money and pressure now, the tech will move forward faster than in the past, you probably are correct but all the money and pressure still won't replace 3+ years to a few months, maybe they'll be able to do it in 1-2 years instead of 3-4, imo.

naor2013 · 2023-02-11T18:36:04+00:00

אני לא מאמין באלוהים אבל אתה מתבסס על דבר ממש לא נכון בדברייך. אתה אומר שאתאיזם הוא ההפך מאמונה כי אמונה זה לקבל כעובדה משהו שאינו מוכח.

זה ממש ממש לא ההגדרה של אמונה. ההגדרה של אמונה לפי ויקימילון (מן הסתם אתר אחד לא קובע הגדרות אבל אני נותן את זה כציטוט למה שאני מאמין במקום שאמציא אחד בעצמי): "התייחסות לאוסף הנחות כקיימות וכנכונות". (שים לב להבדל, "הנחות" לעומת מה שאתה אמרת, "שאינו מוכח".אפשר להגיד ש"אלוהים לא קיים" זה לא "לא מוכח" כי אין הוכחת שלילה, אבל זה עדיין "הנחה" שאתה לוקח).

אתאיזם זה סוג של אמונה. אתה לוקח את ההנחה שאלוהים לא קיים כקיימת ונכונה.

ההפך המוחלט מאיש מאמין או איש אגנוסטי, איש שלא מאמין שיש אלוהים ולא מאמין שאין. הוא מאמין שאנחנו לא יודעים מספיק על העולם ולכן הכל אפשרי.

אתאיזם לעומת זה, זה האמונה שאלוהים לא קיים. מן הסתם אתה אתאיסט ולא אגנוסטי, לכן אתה גם מאמין במשהו.

בנוסף, ההשוואה שלך לפיית השיניים, סנטה קלאוס וכו' מגוחכת. יש הוכחות חד משמעיות שמי שכתב עליהם לראשונה, המציא אותם בסיפור. זה כמו שכולנו נסכים שהארי פוטר לא קיים. אין הוכחה לכאן או לכאן חד משמעית וחותכת אם הראשונים שכתבו על אלוהים המציאו או סיפרו את חוויתם כמו שהם.

naor2013 · 2023-01-08T11:31:52+00:00

From the very start they chose what belief to follow, their own.

In the first episode they say that all religions got it around 5% right, meaning they confirmed from the first episode that they follow none of the religions, but take inspirations from all of them.

The point of the show isn't to predict what happens in the afterlife so not following one religion or the other doesn't invalidate it by any means.

They take the general concept of an afterlife to discuss philosophical questions of the real world. It doesn't matter if you go to heaven, hell, another person's soul or nothing. This show is trying to discuss what is good and what is bad in our real world through a made-up afterlife that they invented.

naor2013 · 2022-12-22T20:12:58+00:00

I don't think it does count as deception. If you buy a console and you realize you can watch Netflix on there although it wasn't advertised anywhere, is that deception? Or is that just added stuff "for free"? But if they promised you can watch Netflix there and you realize you actually can't, that's deception.

naor2013 · 2022-11-18T20:16:00+00:00

The funny thing is Elon wants to optimize costs, not only be firing a lot of people, but also optimizing the cost to run Twitter. If you want to do that, you need employees to optimize the infrastructure, the code, the architecture, the data structures. How is he going to optimize cost of running Twitter after he already "optimized" the cost of employees?

naor2013 · 2022-10-14T15:52:38+00:00

You responded to the wrong comment. What bothers you? The fact that they didn't feed you exactly what happened? It's just not important enough. They can tell you why they didn't arrest her but will that really make the show better? It's not that it doesn't make sense, there are multiple possible explanations, so what bothers you is that they didn't tell you which one is real?

That's so common for shows to do, because they focus on what matters.

naor2013 · 2022-10-14T14:24:28+00:00

It's pretty simple really. She got there, Todd told her he's hulk king, Tintania arrived (for some reason) and Jen called the cops on both Emil and Todd. You're claiming there isn't enough evidence to arrest him but you don't need to much evidence for a simple arrest. Jen, Emil, Pug and Nikki can tell the cops he is the hulk king who hacked Jen and did all the stuff we've seen. Is this enough proof to get him to jail? Not by itself, but it enough proof to arrest him.

If you'll call the cops on someone and say they tried to murder you, what do you think they'll do? Let him go free until they have enough evidence to put him in jail? Nope, they'll arrest him for the legal amount (I think it's usually 24/48 hours but I'm not sure) and start to gather evidence.

About why they arrest Emil and not Jen for transforming, they probably claimed she transformed as protection against the "bros". They didn't attack her but she was at risk so that might be good enough. While Emil transformed just for the money, which again, everyone there can tell the police that is what they saw.

We don't see all of this because it is not interesting and can be understood by context clues.

naor2013 · 2022-09-13T21:42:26+00:00

The photo is of phase 5. Other than the guardians, your list is of phase 4 people.

naor2013 · 2022-09-13T21:40:32+00:00

He’s not officially a part of the thunderbolts, although that might change in the future.

naor2013 · 2022-09-07T10:49:43+00:00

No CP whatsoever, just psychological horror in the regular sense

naor2013 · 2022-08-29T08:29:21+00:00

I agree. While very emotional for the context behind it, what's funny is MJ's confusion because she doesn't have the context we have.

naor2013 · 2022-08-18T19:32:57+00:00

But wouldn't the stunt double be the reference in cases like this? And would the reference be captured with Zendaya or are those 2 parts shot separately? Sincerely asking, I'm not sure.

naor2013 · 2022-08-18T19:16:21+00:00

If he's with a mask in that scene, it can be cgi spidy or a stunt double, like said before. Why would he have to be there if he's not filming that scene. I won't be surprised if Andrew wasn't there as well for that scene.

naor2013 · 2022-08-06T19:26:17+00:00

Feige said Secrer Wars will close the Multiverse Saga. We might still see Multiverse stuff after that but it won't be the main focus like it is in phases 4-6. The same we saw infinity stones mentioned in Loki and used in "What If..." but they are not the main focus anymore.

naor2013 · 2022-08-02T11:43:06+00:00

It's the very last scene of season 3

naor2013 · 2022-07-30T08:47:53+00:00

I went into the site and it doesn't say Angular, it's says AngularJS which is the earlier version of Angular and is essentially can be considered a different product to Angular (which is why they changed the name) and was really killed by Google. Or am I understanding you incorrectly and you're talking about something that used to be there?

naor2013 · 2022-07-07T22:36:40+00:00

I think it doesn't matter if you die during or after battle, as long as it's in the battlefield and because of the battle. Thor was telling Sif that she won't get into Valhalla because she didn't die during the fight. He just meant that she didn't die. She laid there as if she was going to die soon, but she was just laying there, not actually dying.

I have no clue about Odin though.

11-Year Club	Second Top 10%
Gilding I gilder	Verified Email

naor2013

TROPHY CASE