Google, Are You Sure No Country in Africa Starts with a 'K'?
theatlantic.com
theatlantic.com
> Given how nonsensical this response is, you might not be surprised to hear that the snippet was originally written by ChatGPT. But you may be surprised by how it became a featured answer on the internet’s preeminent knowledge base. The search engine is pulling this blurb from a user post on Hacker News ... itself quoting from a website called Emergent Mind, which exists to teach people about AI - including its flaws. At some point, Google’s crawlers scraped the text, and now its algorithm automatically presents the chatbot’s nonsense answer as fact, with a link to the Hacker News discussion
So "intelligent thought", which is "having checked your notions", was implemented as "scraping utterances made" without any expected consistency check.
> trained on the same dataset for long enough, pretty much every model with enough weights and training time converges to the same point. (…)
> This is a surprising observation! It implies that model behavior is not determined by architecture, hyperparameters, or optimizer choices. It’s determined by your dataset, nothing else. Everything else is a means to an end in efficiently delivery compute to approximating that dataset.
> Then, when you refer to “Lambda”, “ChatGPT”, “Bard”, or “Claude” then, it’s not the model weights that you are referring to. It’s the dataset.
https://nonint.com/2023/06/10/the-it-in-ai-models-is-the-dat...
– Is scraping good enough? Can we do without curated datasets? (This would be the most significant encyclopedic effort in human history – and we are by no means ready for this.)
Edit: It may be worth remembering the Mundaneum, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundaneum
Alternative URL: https://archive.ph/7PGMJ