|
|
|
|
|
by visarga
1862 days ago
|
|
I'll take logical reasoning over "stories" any day. And calling language model "parrots" is flouting. Many people worked for decades to reach that accomplishment, here come the critics to shit all over it. > But how do you update a culture's shared set of beliefs? It's not the place of AI models to do activism, and it's a slippery slope leading to AI based inquisition. Take a look at how China uses AI to oppress their own people. |
|
I don't understand why you'd find the use of the term 'parrot' offensive. Language models extract linguistic patterns. GPTs generate patterns based on those which they have been trained on. That's a process that can be described as parroting. If you find it offensive because you think it implies that the researchers coming up with these models aren't worthy of credit, I think you are reading something into it that isn't there. At least not from my perspective.
When I mentioned updating cultural beliefs, I was referring to the traditional way of going about it: through cultural products. My point was that the "PC crowd" would be better off if they relied on this strategy rather than attempting to halt the development of language models. I was absolutely not suggesting that language models should be used to "train" members of society. That's a dystopian nightmare.