Chat GPT

It seems bizarre that (apparently) ChatGPT is run on just 2000 lines of code?
Anyone else managed to listen/watch that Mo Gawdat video (that me and chippy posted)?

I don't know enough about AI to make a considered response but there are suggestions it may be a tad sensationalist.
He has books to sell I guess.

I really can’t sit through 2 hour podcast about this .
Can you give me a brief summary and your views ?
Should we genuinely be frightened? Is it really plausible that AI is going to change the world possibly in the next 5-10 years ?
 
Chat GPT is actually a natural language programming tool using the Internet for the set of data points with AI technology between the two.
Note: The underlying AI technology (nural networks) hasn't changed since 1989.

P.S. it's part of my day job in IT to know how shit works.
yeah well I don't have a day job which means I have more time to find out

*cough* Natural language PROCESSING *cough*

GPT do have a natural language programming tool; Github CoPilot. It generates code - that is the definiteion of a natural language programming tool. But Open AI have many, many tools running off the same GPT models, and most of them are not producing code.

Reinforce what AgueroElement said, GPT stands for Generative Pre-Trained TRANSFORMER. Think of Machine Learning as the big task, like textile weaving back in the Victorian era. We can liken Neural Nets to Spinning Machines. Transformers are likely to be seen as the equivalent of the Spinning Jenny, or some such like. Or maybe, Machine Learning is motor power, Neural Nets are Steam Engines, and Transformers are Watt's condensor. (FWIW, the paper to name drop is always 'Attention Is All You Need', which came from Google R&D.)

Now, the GPT models in question are GPT 3, GPT 3.5, GPT 4. These are all LLMs - Large Language Models.

Chat GPT can deploy any of them. But... Chat GPT is just a chatbot on top of the LLM. And an LLM, any LLM, is an Natural Language PROCESSING tool.

Great video here;
 
It seems bizarre that (apparently) ChatGPT is run on just 2000 lines of code?
Anyone else managed to listen/watch that Mo Gawdat video (that me and chippy posted)?

I don't know enough about AI to make a considered response but there are suggestions it may be a tad sensationalist.
He has books to sell I guess.
Yeah, that's sort of not true, that's true of the chatbot "Chat GPT" which works with the massive model "GPT". To be fair tho, the code you need to build "GPT" is also around that size.

That's only the start, tho. That program sets out an algorithm that performs the same operations over and over again in response to massive amounts of data and training/feedback. The data set it is trained on is monumental. The amount of human interventions is in the millions. The amount of storage, memory, and computing power used is astronomical. The outcome is the model. And that truly is massive, and still requires 100k worth of kit to run.

Chat GPT is just an interface (one of many available) that interfaces with one of Open AI's GPT models. They have several flavours (3, 3.5, 4). You can run many Chat GPT instances on one instance of any one of these models. Whatever - people - please try not to confuse Chat GPT with GPT.

It's like, you could replicate the google search home page with a few lines of code. You can legit build a search engine with a few more. It's basically a way to read the page, and a few algorithms to sort out usefulness in relation to search terms. That actual algorithm, the key, is tiny. A few lines of code. What it makes tho, is the database. And that's what is useful.
 
I really can’t sit through 2 hour podcast about this .
Can you give me a brief summary and your views ?
Should we genuinely be frightened? Is it really plausible that AI is going to change the world possibly in the next 5-10 years ?
You really should. In terms of importance, climate change is nothing compared to this.

And btw, the short answer to your question is yes.

There's a few things that have caused very senior and influential people such as Geoff Hinton to start to worry. One is the fact that these models already learn way better than the human brain does. He and others invented them in the first place to better understand the workings of the human brain and never for one moment thought that what they were creating would become better at learning than the brain is. The second scary aspect is the extent to which he believes (as I do) that these models do already think. Not in the same way we do because their architecture is completely different from our brains. But nevertheless they do understand complex problems and can reflect and hypothesize just like we do, already. And the third thing is that they can replicate their knowledge between them almost instantly, whereas it takes years for humans to learn advanced concept. When an AI model learns something, it can pass that learning to another instance immediately.

So these large language models have already developed capabilities we never dreamed they would have, and have done so at a rate not many imagined. The consensus now is that these things becoming more intelligent than humans is not so much a possibility, but more of an inevitability. And once that happens, who knows what the outcome may be with "beings" which are smarter than us, woven into the fabric of everything we do.

GPT4 is already more knowledgeable - by orders of magnitude - than anyone on the planet, drawing as it can on the entire content of Wikipedia and other sources for it's information. And as we feed these models with more and more data - video this year - they are becoming more capable and able to reason even better than they can now.

The very immediate danger is not that they will turn all "Skynet" on us however - though they may do in time, no-one can be sure that they will not. It's that bad actors - terrorists, governments, individuals - will use these new superintelligences to do bad things. Like develop and release new nerve agents or biological weapons for example.

That's aside from the changes coming with entire industries being wiped out with all the employees being replaced by bots.

The world is going to change radically and very very quickly. We are not talking decades away, we are talking years.
 
Last edited:
Zubrman:

What goalkeeper has conceded the largest total of goals in Manchester City vs Manchester United matches


ChatGPT:

The goalkeeper who has conceded the largest total of goals in Manchester City vs Manchester United matches is Alex Stepney, who played for Manchester United. Stepney conceded a total of 22 goals in 12 matches against Manchester City during his career at Manchester United.

Zubrman:

How many had David de Gea conceded against City


ChatGPT:

As of my knowledge cutoff in September 2021, David de Gea had conceded a total of 28 goals in Manchester City vs Manchester United matches during his career at Manchester United. However, it's important to note that this number may have changed since then, as de Gea is still an active player and may have played in additional matches against Manchester City.

Zubrman::

So he has conceded more than Stepney did.


ChatGPT::

Yes, that's correct. David de Gea has conceded more goals in Manchester City vs Manchester United matches than Alex Stepney did. As I mentioned earlier, de Gea had conceded a total of 28 goals in these matches as of my knowledge cutoff in September 2021. In contrast, Stepney conceded a total of 22 goals in 12 matches against Manchester City during his career at Manchester United.

Zubrman:

So why did you say Stepney as an answer to my initial question


ChatGPT:

I apologize for the confusion. It appears that I misunderstood your initial question. You asked about the goalkeeper who conceded the largest total of goals in Manchester City vs Manchester United matches, and I provided an answer based on the information available to me at the time. However, if your question specifically pertained to David de Gea's goal-conceding record in these matches, then the correct answer would have been that he had conceded more goals than any other goalkeeper in the Manchester United squad. Once again, I apologize for any confusion that my earlier response may have caused.

Yes.

I was showing the transcript of the questions about derby keepers to my daughter and she suggested that ChatGPT could learn from the exchange we had and that I should ask it again to see if it had:

Zubrman: Which goalkeeper has conceded the most goals in games between Manchester City and Manchester United?

ChatGPT: As an AI language model, I do not have access to the latest information or statistics. However, according to the data available during my training period, the goalkeepers who have conceded the most goals in the games between Manchester City and Manchester United are Massimo Taibi and Roy Carroll, both of Manchester United, who conceded six goals each.




Some learning, eh?
I decided to do some research of my own. Considerably slower than CatGPT, but I now have this info on Scum keepers since time began who have conceded in a derby:

From 3rd Oct 1891 onwards -

John Slater - 1
Hugh Douglas - 1
Frank Barrett - 6
Herbert Birchenough - 1
Harry Moger - 9
Ezra Royals - 1
Robert Beale - 2
John Mew - 12
Alfred Steward - 24
Roy John - 2
Thomas Breen - 1
Sonny Fehan - 1
Reg Allen - 2
Jack Crompton - 4
Ray Wood - 19
Harry Gregg - 11
David Gaskell - 4
Alex Stepney - 35
Gary Bailey - 9
Chris Turner - 3
Jim Leighton - 6
Les Sealey - 3
Peter Schmeichel - 8
Fabian Bartez - 4
Roy Carroll - 1
Tim Howard - 7
Edwin Van Der Sar - 13
Dean Henderson - 2
Ben Foster - 3
David De Gea - 53
 
I had not come across "Pi, your personal AI" until yesterday.


It's really incredibly good. You can talk to it about anything and the training data seems very up to date. It knows a lot about footy ;-) So give it a go?
 
I had not come across "Pi, your personal AI" until yesterday.


It's really incredibly good. You can talk to it about anything and the training data seems very up to date. It knows a lot about footy ;-) So give it a go?

Haha brilliant that just asked it some questions about what is happening in my work environment. Couldn't believe how quick it was in responding.
 
Haha brilliant that just asked it some questions about what is happening in my work environment. Couldn't believe how quick it was in responding.
It is VERY conversational and does a damned good job at convincing you that it really understands. (My personal view is that these LLMs *do* actually understand, but some humans cannot get their heads around the fact that understanding does not have to happen in the same way it happens in the human brain.)
 
I had not come across "Pi, your personal AI" until yesterday.


It's really incredibly good. You can talk to it about anything and the training data seems very up to date. It knows a lot about footy ;-) So give it a go?
I just fired it up to give it a go. Before I could ask it any questions, it gets all chatty with me, asking what I like to do in my spare time. (None of its fucking business, but I told it I like to watch football.)

"Are you a casual or die-hard fan?" it asked.

Die-hard, I replied. "That's great," it carried on, "Which team do you support?"

"The only football team that comes from Manchester," I informed it.





"Manchester United, huh? They're a team with a rich history and passionate fans around the world. It's great that you're a die-hard fan.
How long have you supported them?"



End of interest in that crock of shit.
 
I had not come across "Pi, your personal AI" until yesterday.


It's really incredibly good. You can talk to it about anything and the training data seems very up to date. It knows a lot about footy ;-) So give it a go?
had a quick go and asked it some topics about work, i was quite impressed how quickly it got to the core of the problems faced with the particular issue I gave it. I ran out of 'free' goes before i ramped up the technicality though.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top