Podcast Summary
The Limits of Generative AI: A Cautionary Tale: Generative AI systems like ChatGPT can give the appearance of intelligence, but their true reasoning abilities are a concern, with some experts warning of potential risks if superintelligent AI is developed.
The capabilities of generative AI systems like ChatGPT, while impressive, raise questions about their true intelligence and reasoning abilities. The story of Clever Hans, a horse that seemed to perform mathematical feats in the late 1800s, serves as a cautionary tale. While it appeared the horse was thinking and reasoning, it was actually responding to subtle cues from its trainer. Similarly, some experts in artificial intelligence are concerned that ChatGPT and other generative AI systems may be giving the appearance of intelligence without truly understanding or reasoning. This is a significant concern as the development of superintelligent AI has the potential to pose an existential risk to humanity. It's important to continue exploring and questioning the true capabilities of these systems to ensure they are beneficial to society and do not pose unintended risks.
AI aces US bar exam, demonstrating human-like legal reasoning: AI model GPT 4 passed the US bar exam, showcasing its extensive legal knowledge and ability to apply it to complex cases, signifying a major leap forward in AI capabilities for the legal profession.
The latest AI models, such as GPT 4, have shown impressive capabilities in solving complex problems and demonstrating human-like reasoning, even surpassing the abilities of some human lawyers. This was evident when researchers attempted to have GPT 4 pass the rigorous US bar exam. The AI aced the exam, displaying an extensive knowledge of the law and the ability to apply it to complex cases. For instance, when deciding on the admissibility of character evidence in a hypothetical criminal trial, GPT 4 applied specific rules of evidence and considered exceptions and loopholes to reach the correct conclusion. This legal reasoning is a critical skill for lawyers. In real-life legal work, GPT 4 continued to impress, even when faced with challenges like the Enron accounting scandal. This development signifies a significant leap forward in AI capabilities and could have profound implications for the legal profession.
Using AI for Enron e-discovery: GPT-4, a large language model, was used for Enron e-discovery, helping find fraud instances beyond keyword searches. However, it's not truly reasoning or thinking like a human, but rather mimicking human behavior based on patterns in the data it was trained on.
During Enron's downfall, while employee retirement funds were being wiped out, top executives were making millions. The committee investigating the scandal asked Enron CEO Ken Lay to turn over thousands of documents. To help with the document review, known as e-discovery, Pablo Arredondo used GPT-4 to find instances of fraud. This is an expensive part of litigation, and while keyword searches can be effective, they have their limitations. A human lawyer would look for inferences and nuances, which GPT-4 also proved to be good at. It found an email where someone was jokingly discussing Enron fraud using a Sesame Street analogy. This discovery was remarkable, and it raised questions about whether GPT-4 was engaging in human-level reasoning or just advanced text prediction. Professor Emily Bender, a linguistics professor at the University of Washington, argues that while GPT-4 may look and feel like it's reasoning, it's not truly thinking like a human. It's a large language model that models text based on word distributions, making it a more sophisticated form of predictive text. The recent advancement is the vast amount of training data and conversational data it has, allowing it to carry on a conversation. However, it's essential to remember that GPT-4 is not actually thinking or reasoning like a human, but rather mimicking human behavior based on patterns in the data it was trained on. This raises important ethical and societal questions about the role of AI in our lives.
The Misunderstood Abilities of AI Models: AI models can mimic human language but lack the deep understanding and ability to grasp context that humans possess, leading to potential misinterpretations and anthropomorphizing.
While conversing with advanced AI models may give the impression of understanding, they lack the ability to truly comprehend language at a deep, meaningful level. They excel in syntax, grammar, and the form of language, but they don't grasp the meaning behind the words. This concept was emphasized by Bender in her 2021 paper titled "On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots." The term "stochastic parrot" is used to describe large language models' ability to repeat phrases from their training data without actual understanding, in a random yet statistically probable manner. When we learn a language, we combine meaning and form, leading to a deep understanding. However, AI models only mimic and match patterns without the human ability to imagine or understand context. This can lead to anthropomorphizing AI, as we unconsciously attribute human thoughts and emotions to it. Bender argues that the term "artificial intelligence" is a misnomer, as it implies a level of consciousness and intelligence that these models do not possess. Instead, she suggests using terms like "automated pattern matching at scale" or "synthetic media extruding machines" to more accurately describe their capabilities. Her perspective puts her at odds with the AI industry, which often emphasizes the intelligence and human-like qualities of these models.
Chatbots lack genuine understanding or reasoning, they only mimic human interaction: Despite the human-like text generated by chatbots like ChatGPT, they don't truly understand or reason, instead they mimic human interaction through pattern matching.
While chatbots like ChatGPT can generate human-like text and even give the impression of understanding or solving problems, they do not possess actual intelligence. Emily Bender argues that this technology is overhyped due to misrepresentation by companies like OpenAI. The output from these models is a result of pattern matching rather than genuine understanding or reasoning. Melanie Mitchell, an influential AI researcher, adds that defining intelligence and predicting the future capabilities of AI has always been a challenge in the industry. The idea that achieving general artificial intelligence is just around the corner based on a computer's ability to perform a specific task, like playing chess, has been proven incorrect in the past. The inspiration for AI has always been human intelligence, but our understanding of it remains incomplete, making progress in the field heavily reliant on speculation rather than solid scientific theories.
Skepticism towards ChatGPT's reasoning abilities: ChatGPT can generate human-like text and mimic reasoning but lacks true understanding and problem-solving abilities of a human.
While large language models like ChatGPT can generate human-like text and even give the impression of reasoning, their abilities are still limited. Konstantin Arkudas, a researcher in natural language understanding, shares his fascination with the advancements in conversational AI but expresses skepticism towards claims of true reasoning. These claims have been fueled by marketing and media hype, leading to exaggerated reports of ChatGPT's capabilities. For instance, stories of ChatGPT passing graduate-level exams or securing degrees have been debunked. In one instance, a business professor tested ChatGPT on only five exam questions and gave it a B- grade. This highlights the need for caution when interpreting AI's performance and the importance of understanding the context and limitations of these models. Arkudas further tested ChatGPT's reasoning abilities by attempting to have it solve a Sudoku puzzle. Despite being trained on millions of examples, the chatbot failed to provide a correct solution. These instances demonstrate that while ChatGPT can mimic human language and sometimes appear to reason, it lacks the true understanding and problem-solving abilities of a human. However, it's important to note that these models are continually improving, and their capabilities may expand in the future. For now, it's crucial to approach AI advancements with a critical perspective, recognizing their limitations and potential for growth.
The pursuit of AGI remains uncertain: Despite advancements in large language models, AGI remains elusive due to concerns over understanding, potential for cheating, and the risk of false patterns leading to correct answers.
While large language models like ChatGPT 4 can perform certain tasks and even demonstrate shallow reasoning, they are not yet capable of achieving Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). The concerns lie in their ability to have truly understood the information they're processing and the potential for them to cheat by recalling information they've been trained on, rather than reasoning from first principles. Additionally, these models might latch onto bogus patterns, leading them to the correct answer for the wrong reasons. Companies are able to raise significant funds based on the potential of these models, driven by the excitement and emotional attachment to the idea of AGI, but it's essential to recognize that we're not there yet. The field is progressing, and future models might bring about new breakthroughs, but for now, the path to AGI remains uncertain.
The hype around AGI: Driven by industry needs and human tendencies: The development of AGI is fueled by business opportunities and human tendency to anthropomorphize AI, but it's essential to remember that AGI may not resemble human intelligence and understanding the limitations is crucial.
The excitement and momentum surrounding Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is driven by a combination of factors. Companies and investors are eager to see AGI solve bigger, more lucrative problems in industries like energy and healthcare. Users, on the other hand, have a tendency to anthropomorphize AI systems, attributing human-like understanding and emotions to them based on their responses. However, it's important to remember that machine intelligences may not necessarily resemble human intelligence at all. The history of Hans the Clever Horse serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of attributing human-like intelligence to non-human entities. Furthermore, there exists an ideology among some in the AI field to build AGI at all costs, regardless of potential risks or ethical concerns. It's crucial to approach the development of AGI with a clear understanding of its limitations and potential consequences.
Explore these engaging podcasts: Tectonic, Capital Ideas, and 1800flowers.com: Discover Tectonic for in-depth stories, Capital Ideas for investment insights, and 1800flowers.com for a blend of love, care, and business
There are a variety of engaging podcasts available across different industries and platforms. For instance, Tectonic, produced by Manuela Saragosa, offers in-depth stories with sound design by Samantha Giovinco and Breen Turner, and original music by Metaphor Music. The Feet's audio division is behind it, and you can subscribe on your preferred podcast platform. Another option is Capital Ideas, featuring unscripted conversations with investment professionals led by Capital Group CEO, Mike Gitlin. New episodes are published monthly. Lastly, 1800flowers.com isn't just a gift-giving destination; it's a place where love and care go into every product, from flowers to baked goods. To explore more, visit their website, 1800flowers.com/acast. Don't forget to subscribe and invest your time in these enriching podcasts.
