Mahlzeit

You were never into video games, right? The reason I ask, is because games use a lot of AI. One might see "AI" in the game settings, or if the game has some editing tool/level builder/ ... one might see it there. If one takes an interest, one might pick up on people talking about the AI of one game or another.

I am always surprised, when I hear people say that LLMs are too simple to be real AI, because I'm thinking that most people who grew up in the last ~20 years would have interacted a lot with these much simpler game AIs. I would have thought that this knowledge would diffuse to parents and peers.

Non-rhetorical question: Any idea why that didn't happen?

Why is it important to you what some corporation does or doesn't do?

Can I ask why this is important to you? Did you donate and don't like how your money is used?

ETA: I asked, because I wondered if it has to do with AI-tech specifically, as many here obviously believe. OP kindly answered my question in DMs. They obviously do not wish the details to be public, but I believe I can say that the answer was very reasonable and not connected to AI-tech. (There's nothing in the answer which is private or couldn't be made public, but it's up to them.)

It's not the definition in the paper. Here is the context:

The idea of emergence was popularized by Nobel Prize-winning physicist P.W. Anderson’s “More Is Different”, which argues that as the complexity of a system increases, new properties may materialize that cannot be predicted even from a precise quantitative understanding of the system’s microscopic details.

What this means is, that we cannot, for example, predict chemistry from physics. Physics studies how atoms interact, which yields important insights for chemistry, but physics cannot be used to predict, say, the table of elements. Each level has its own laws, which must be derived empirically.

LLMs obviously show emergence. Knowing the mathematical, technological, and algorithmic foundation, tells you little about how to use (prompt, train, ...) an AI model. Just like knowing cell biology will not help you interact with people, even if they are only colonies of cells working together.

The paper talks specifically about “emergent abilities of LLMs”:

The term “emergent abilities of LLMs” was recently and crisply defined as “abilities that are not present in smaller-scale models but are present in large-scale models; thus they cannot be predicted by simply extrapolating the performance improvements on smaller-scale models”

The authors further clarify:

In this paper, [...] we specifically mean sharp and unpredictable changes in model outputs as a function of model scale on specific tasks.

Bigger models perform better. An increase in the number of parameters correlates to an increase in the performance on tests. It had been alleged, that some abilities appear suddenly, for no apparent reason. These “emergent abilities of LLMs” are a very specific kind of emergence.

Direct link to paper: Nature Human Behaviour: "Socio-cultural practices may have affected sex differences in stature in Early Neolithic Europe"

(Kudos to https://feddit.de/u/mettwurstkaninchen for posting a report that actually linked to the source.)

It's likely a reference to Yudkowsky or someone along those lines. I don't follow that crowd.

Ich habe versucht, den Text und die Standpunkte des Autors zu verstehen, ganz klar ist es mir aber nicht.

Die Auflösung kommt am Schluss: Der Autor Prof. Dr. Gregor Thüsing [...] war selbst Prozessvertreter vor dem EuGH für die SCHUFA.

Er wird/wurde gut bezahlt, diesen Standpunkt einzunehmen. Der Text wurde geschrieben, weil dafür bezahlt wurde, nicht weil Leute von der Wichtigkeit und Richtigkeit überzeugt waren.

Der EuGH, gut bezahlt, um solche Argumente zu durchdringen, war nicht überzeugt. Man kann also ruhig davon ausgehen, dass da nichts weiter zu verstehen ist.

Part of the platform of the Swedish Pirate Party?

Can't find it in the Election Manifesto 2022, that they have in English. Sounds more like they want copyright to serve society, not to protect interests.

Which pirate party is that?

It's noteworthy that patent law is 20 years to this day. It has survived with its core fairly intact, the main change being that you can no longer get a patent for bringing an invention into the country. Today that is called piracy (poor China).

I believe that is because patents simply have to work for the whole country in encouraging progress. If cultural production is stifled, well... Who cares? The elites in the copyright industry benefit, and they have an outsize influence on public discourse.

Gegenwärtig kann sowas algorithmisch oder menschlich generiert sein, womöglich aus Textbausteinen zusammengesetzt. Sowas kennzeichnet man auch nicht und ich weiß auch nicht, was ich mit der Info anfangen würde. Warum ist es dir wichtig, ob etwas KI ist?

Tja, kann man nicht sagen, wenn man den Text nicht hat...

Es klingt nicht wirklich gut. Sonst beklagt man die mangelnde Digitalisierung und dann wird sowas gefeiert. Versteh ich nich.