Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #stochasticparrots
Most recents (5)
Since we've been looking for more things to do, @emilymbender @mmitchell_ai @mcmillan_majora and I wrote a statement about the horrible "letter" on the AI apocalypse, the very first citation of which, was our #StochasticParrots paper.
dair-institute.org/blog/letter-st…
dair-institute.org/blog/letter-st…
On Tuesday...the Future of Life Institute published a letter asking for a six-month minimum moratorium on "training AI systems more powerful than GPT-4," signed by more than 2,000 people, including Turing award winner Yoshua Bengio & one of the world’s richest men, Elon Musk.
While there are a number of recommendations in the letter that we agree with (and proposed in our 2021 peer-reviewed paper known informally as "Stochastic Parrots"), such as "provenance and watermarking systems to help distinguish real from synthetic" media,
The very first citation in this stupid letter is to our #StochasticParrots Paper,
"AI systems with human-competitive intelligence can pose profound risks to society and humanity, as shown by extensive research[1]"
EXCEPT
"AI systems with human-competitive intelligence can pose profound risks to society and humanity, as shown by extensive research[1]"
EXCEPT
that one of the main points we make in the paper is that one of the biggest harms of large language models, is caused by CLAIMING that LLMs have "human-competitive intelligence."
They basically say the opposite of what we say and cite our paper?
They basically say the opposite of what we say and cite our paper?
The rest of the people they cite in footnote #1 are all longtermists. Again, please read
currentaffairs.org/2021/07/the-da…
currentaffairs.org/2021/07/the-da…
Back in 2017 Long Island Ice Tea - known for its undistinguished, barely drinkable sugar-water - changed its name to "Long Blockchain Corp." Its shares surged to a peak of 400% over their pre-announcement price. 1/
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
pluralistic.net/2023/03/09/aut… 2/
pluralistic.net/2023/03/09/aut… 2/
The company announced no specific integrations with any kind of blockchain, nor has it made any such integrations since. 3/
The really remarkable thing isn't just that #Microsoft has decided that the future of #search isn't links to relevant materials, but instead lengthy, florid paragraphs written by a #chatbot who happens to be a habitual liar - even more remarkable is that #Google agrees. 1/
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
pluralistic.net/2023/02/16/twe… 2/
pluralistic.net/2023/02/16/twe… 2/
Microsoft has nothing to lose. It's spent billions on #Bing, a search-engine no one voluntarily uses. Might as well try something so stupid it might just work. But why is Google, a monopolist who has a 90+% share of search worldwide, jumping off the same bridge as Microsoft? 3/
Facebook (sorry: Meta) AI: Check out our "AI" that lets you access all of humanity's knowledge.
Also Facebook AI: Be careful though, it just makes shit up.
This isn't even "they were so busy asking if they could"—but rather they failed to spend 5 minutes asking if they could.
>>
Also Facebook AI: Be careful though, it just makes shit up.
This isn't even "they were so busy asking if they could"—but rather they failed to spend 5 minutes asking if they could.
>>
Using a large LM as a search engine was a bad idea when it was proposed by a search company. It's still a bad idea now, from a social media company. Fortunately, @chirag_shah and I already wrote the paper laying that all out:
dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/34…
>>
dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/34…
>>
In the popular press/general public-facing Q&A about our paper:
technologyreview.com/2022/03/29/104…
washington.edu/news/2022/03/1…
>>
technologyreview.com/2022/03/29/104…
washington.edu/news/2022/03/1…
>>
