Technology

60112 readers

2588 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

458

The GPT Era Is Already Ending (www.theatlantic.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world

159 comments fedilink hide all child comments

If this is the way to superintelligence, it remains a bizarre one. “This is back to a million monkeys typing for a million years generating the works of Shakespeare,” Emily Bender told me. But OpenAI’s technology effectively crunches those years down to seconds. A company blog boasts that an o1 model scored better than most humans on a recent coding test that allowed participants to submit 50 possible solutions to each problem—but only when o1 was allowed 10,000 submissions instead. No human could come up with that many possibilities in a reasonable length of time, which is exactly the point. To OpenAI, unlimited time and resources are an advantage that its hardware-grounded models have over biology. Not even two weeks after the launch of the o1 preview, the start-up presented plans to build data centers that would each require the power generated by approximately five large nuclear reactors, enough for almost 3 million homes.

https://archive.is/xUJMG

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's not close to 100%, it is by formal definition 100%. It's a calculus thing, when there's a y value that depends on an x value. And y approaches 1 when x approaches infinity, then y = 1 when x = infinite.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

it is by formal definition 100%.

it is not

And y approaches 1 when x approaches infinity, then y = 1 when x = infinite.

you weren't paying attention in your calculus.

y is never 1, because x is never infinite. if you could reach the infinity, it wouldn't be infinity.

for any n within the function's domain: abs(value of y in n minus limit of y) is number bigger than zero. that is the definition of the limit. brush up on your definitions 😆

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Except, that's in the real world of physics. In this mathematical/philosophical hypothetical metaphysical scenario, x is infinite. Thus the probability is 1. It doesn't just approach infinite, it is infinite.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

Except, that’s in the real world of physics. In this (...) scenario, x is infinite.

oh boy, no. if anything, it would be the other way around. in real world calculations, you can sometime approximate and still get reasonably precise result, or boundary, depending on your needs. not so in math.

hence the jokes like "for mathematician, pi as a pi. for physicist, pi is roughly 3,14, for civil engineer, pi is roughly 3."

Thus the probability is 1.

it is not.

It doesn’t just approach infinite, it is infinite.

x is not infinite. x is a variable, that is to be substituted by specific number. infinity is not a number, it is a concept that express the fact that you explore how the function behaves when you are substituting bigger and bigger numbers. but none of these numbers are "infinity". it is always specific number and the result never reaches the limit of the function. in this case, it is never 1, no matter how big number you substitute.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limit_of_a_function