this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
78 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1394 readers
72 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's gonna turn out to be an filipino call center isn't it.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

we have finally achieved A Guy in India

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

That's one way to put a sentient being on the other end of the request, I guess.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I don't think it's alive, I think it's talking to its self. They're making a Chinese whisper machine, and it will remain so until it has embodiment, subjective and changing goals, and a will of it's own.

That's part of intelligence, but it's still a reverse engineering take on things.

In actuality we have intelligence because our threat detection and social protection/survival goals became abstract enough for self-awareness to occur.

EDIT: Telephone game is what I meant.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Chinese whisper

Complete tangent but outside of the commonwealth, this game is referred to by the much less racist moniker “telephone”

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I figured he was talking about Searle's Chinese room thought experiment. Searle sucks though, so that's probably also racist (in addition to being stupid.)

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

In 2024 it is, at the very least, extremely uncomfortable to read Searle describe Chinese writing as "meaningless scribbles", "formal symbols"*, "squiggle squiggle", and "squoggle squoggle". Basically taking Chinese, ignoring the fact that it's a real language used by real people and is not alien nor inscrutable nor mathematical, and using it as a prop to purposefully obfuscate a thought experiment.

But that's like, just my opinion man.

* The paper never seems to get around to calling English letters symbols I wonder why.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

the other thing about this that's often come to mind for me is that the "who" picked in such things tends to be telling of the speaker, and of their perception of "impenetrable"

relatedly, a somewhat common phrase around this side of the world is/was "it's greek to me". I don't know the history of why it came into public lexicon around here (whether it was imported or grew locally), but been curious.

which leads to my sidebar and sneer: it'd be nice if it were easier to research things like this, and good god the modern internet makes it hard to do that. holy fuck what a tsunami of dogshit. and then fucking LLMs and openai come around, going "HOLD MY BEER". le sigh.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

relatedly, a somewhat common phrase around this side of the world is/was “it’s greek to me”. I don’t know the history of why it came into public lexicon around here (whether it was imported or grew locally), but been curious.

Wikipedia has quite a comprehensive list of similar idioms from a lot of different languages. Chinese gets a lot of mentions, but so do Greek and Spanish. Plus Turkish and Hebrew. As far as I can tell the Chinese describe any incomprehensible language as "Martian". But "It's Greek to me" goes right back to the Romans.

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

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

But “It’s Greek to me” goes right back to the Romans.

The wiki seems to say the aphorism originates with medieval scribes and Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.

The actual ancient Romans are unlikely to have had such qualms, since at the time Greek was much more widely understood than Latin, so much so that many important roman works like Caesar's Memoirs and Marcus Aurelius' Meditations were originally written in Greek, with the Latin versions being translations.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

Pedantic note: Yes, Meditations (a phisosophical treatise) was written in Koine, Commentarii de Bello Gallico (veni, vedi, vici—self-aggrandizing combat-reports meant for the senate and propaganda) or other "published" works from Caesar were not.

Although bonus points, the ancient sources portray Caesar (a proper educated major family Patrician) as speaking his dying words—if reported saying anything at all—in Greek, not in Latin: "Καὶ σὺ τέκνον" (Even you, child) rendered in Shakespeare as "Et tu, Brute".

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Thank you for explaining that. I, an American, have never heard the term “Chinese whisper”, but I’ve definitely heard of the telephone game.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It’s much more awkward as a subject of the crown. I tried explaining the game “telestrations” as pictionary + chinese whispers before I had this knowledge. I didn’t know!!! It’s even right there in the name!!! I swear I’m not racist!!!

(Note: I am of chinese origin and have heard my extended family mangle messages through the telephone. So both names are real to me)

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

As a white British dude the problem is that "Telephone" is an Americanism, so I think the solution is that we find an entirely new name to describe speech-like yet utterly incomprehensible-to-the-listener noises that's completely devoid of cultural appropriation. I suggest "This is all Trump to me". The game could be "Trump Tweets".

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Definitely that. "It's all covfefe to me"

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Bottom Trumps

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

That’s OpenAI admitting that o1’s “chain of thought” is faked after the fact. The “chain of thought” does not show any internal processes of the LLM — o1 just returns something that looks a bit like a logical chain of reasoning.

I think it's fake "reasoning" but I don't know if (all of) OpenAI thinks that. They probably think hiding this data prevents cot training data from being extracted. I just don't know how deep the stupid runs.