[HN Gopher] Philosophers on GPT-3
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Philosophers on GPT-3
        
       Author : freediver
       Score  : 22 points
       Date   : 2020-07-30 22:07 UTC (52 minutes ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (dailynous.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (dailynous.com)
        
       | wrnr wrote:
       | I think GPT-3 is a technical marvel but it did not reveal
       | anything about language that wasn't already known by linguists
       | for at least a 100 years. I've read this funny dialog generated
       | by GPT-3 between Bezos and Page, but even that was edited by the
       | "author". At the end of the day it nothing more than an advanced
       | form of Dada poetry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dada#Poetry
        
         | jcims wrote:
         | >I think GPT-3 is a technical marvel but it did not reveal
         | anything about language that wasn't already known by linguists
         | for at least a 100 years.
         | 
         | Yet. It's so incredibly sensitive to input conditions I would
         | say that we really don't know exactly how to explore it fully.
         | I would also argue that we don't really understand a single
         | language until we understand many, and until we tag and
         | classify the inputs I would say we don't even really understand
         | what we passed through the system at all.
        
         | runawaybottle wrote:
         | It's manipulative power is more what I'm interested in. I want
         | to see what percentage of the general population can be
         | manipulated by it. Could care less if it's a pure design that
         | simulates mastery of a language.
         | 
         | I have a hunch it will work on 50% of people.
        
       | hirundo wrote:
       | "GPT-3 on Philosphers" could be more interesting. I would like to
       | read a response by GPT-3 to these essays. It's only fair.
        
       | sroussey wrote:
       | Does GPT-3 actually exist? I only see stories about it, but don't
       | see it or access to it at all.
       | 
       | Maybe it's hanging out on Clubhouse...
        
         | est31 wrote:
         | access exists through a closed beta program who also can only
         | send queries to it, not download the model. This site contains
         | links to a google form to get onto the wait list of beta user
         | candidates: https://openai.com/blog/openai-api/
        
           | Lambdanaut wrote:
           | There are also certain users that do have access to that API
           | that provide public access to it through their own user
           | interface.
        
       | freediver wrote:
       | Chalmers: "As for consciousness, I am open to the idea that a
       | worm with 302 neurons is conscious, so I am open to the idea that
       | GPT-3 with 175 billion parameters is conscious too."
        
       | minimaxir wrote:
       | I'm not fond of both the recurring philosophical and the
       | Skynet/AGI angles that keep popping up regarding GPT-3. "But to
       | [analyze statistical distributions of text] really well, some
       | capacities of general intelligence are needed" isn't correct
       | either; no one would call attention mechanisms used in
       | Transformer models as evidence of intelligence, it's math.
       | 
       | It's easier to argue it's not GPT-3 that's advanced, but it's
       | _humans_ that are simple.
        
         | boltzmann_ wrote:
         | so what's intelligence then? it seems like you're saying humans
         | are not intelligent?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2020-07-30 23:00 UTC)