How can anyone intellectually honest not see that? Same as burning fossil fuels is great and all except we're just burning past biomass and skewing the atmosphere contents dangerously in the process.
How can anyone intellectually honest not see that? Same as burning fossil fuels is great and all except we're just burning past biomass and skewing the atmosphere contents dangerously in the process.
The idea that they can only solve problems that they've seen before in their training data is one of these things that seems obviously true, but doesn't hold up once you consistently use them to solve new problems over time.
If you won't accept my anecdotal stories about this, consider the fact that both Gemini and OpenAI got gold medal level performance in two extremely well regarded academic competitions this year: the International Math Olympiad (IMO) and the International Collegiate Programming Contest (ICPC).
This is notable because both of those contests have brand new challenges created for them that have never been published before. They cannot be in the training data already!
Yet ChatGPT 5 imagines API functions that are not there and cannot figure out basic solutions even when pointed to the original source code of libraries on GitHub.
Can you expand on "cannot figure out basic solutions even when pointed to the original source code of libraries on GitHub"? I have it do that all the time and it works really well for me (at least with modern "reasoning" models like GPT-5 and Claude 4.)
Infallibility is an unrealistic bar to mark LLMs against
it's not a fair comparison
the competitions for humans are a display of ingenuity and intelligence because of the limited resources available to them
meanwhile for the "AI", all it does is demonstrate is that if you have a dozen billion dollar data-centres and a couple of hundred gigawatt hours, which can dedicate to brute-forcing a solution, then you can maybe match the level of one 18 year old, when you have a problem with a specific well known solution
(to be fair, a smart 18 year old)
and short of moores law lasting another 30 years, you won't be getting this from the dogshit LLMs on shatgpt.com
The trend with all of these models is for the price for the same capabilities to drop rapidly - GPT-3 three years ago was over 1,000x the price of much better models today.
I'm not yet ready to bet against that trend holding for a while longer.
right, so only another 27 years of moores law continuing left
> I'm not yet ready to bet against that trend holding for a while longer.
I wouldn't expect an industry evangelist to say otherwise
I expect this industry might prefer an "evangelist" who hasn't written 126 posts about that: https://simonwillison.net/tags/prompt-injection/
(And another 221 posts about ethical concerns with how this stuff works: https://simonwillison.net/tags/ai-ethics/)
(Also what do you mean here by an "evangelist"? Do you mean someone who is an unpaid fan of some of the products, or are you implying a financial relationship?)