Only two years since chatGPT was released and AI at the level of "impressive high school sophomore" is already blasé.
And that their generation of impressive high school sophomore ideas is faster, more reliable, communicated better, and can continue 24/7 (given matching collaboration), relative to their bio high school sophomore counterparts.
I don’t believe any natural high school sophomore as impressive on those terms, has ever existed. Not close.
We humans (I include myself) are awful at judging things or people accurately (in even a loose sense) across more than one or two dimensions.
This is especially true when the mix of ability across several dimensions is novel.
(I also think people under estimate the degree that we, as users and “commanders” of AI, bottleneck their potential. I don’t suggest they are ready to operate without us. But that our relative lack of energy, persistence & focus all limit what we get from them in those dimensions, hiding significant value.
We famously do this with each other, so not surprising. But worth keeping in mind when judging limits: whose limits are we really seeing.)
We all have our idiosyncratically distributed areas of high intuition, expertise and fluency.
None of us need apprentice level help there, except to delegate something routine.
Lower quality ideas there would just gum things up.
And then we all have vast areas of increasingly lesser familiarity.
I find, that the more we grow our strong areas, the more those areas benefit with as efficient contact as possible with as many more other areas as possible. In both trivial and deeper ways.
The better developer I am, in terms of development skill, tool span, novel problem recognition and solution vision, the more often and valuable I find quick AI tutelage on other topics, trivial or non-trivial.
If you know a bright high school student highly familiar with a domain that you are not, but have reason to think that area might be helpful, don’t you think instant access to talk things over with that high schooler would be valuable?
Instant non-trivial answers, perspective and suggestions? With your context and motivations taken into account?
Multiplied by a million bright high school students over a million domains.
—
We can project the capability vector of these models onto one dimension, like “school level idea quality”. But lower dimension projections are literally shadows of the whole.
It if we use them in the direction of their total ability vector (and given they can iterate, it is actually a compounding eigenvector!) and their value goes way beyond “a human high schooler with ideas”.
It does take time to get the most out of a differently calibrated tool.
I don't quite understand the argument here. The future hasn't happened yet. What does it mean to demonstrate the future developments now?
Or imagine this one - computer maps the whole world, suggests a route how to get to any destination?!
You just described a basic search engine.
LLM is kind of a search engine for language
A child learns how to eat solid food and how to walk. That a square peg fits into a square hole. This has nothing to do with language.
people who deaf and mute and cannot read can still reason and solve problems.
big if true