Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

We’re no where near a “good book” (we can’t even do a good 3 paragraphs reliably), nor a “meaningful video.”

You’re confusing a 1000 monkeys (transformers) with 1 human intelligence (AGI). That giant leap hasn’t been met.



Have you seen the tables in Appendix E (starts p. 16) of the Transformer-XL paper? I think they're pretty good.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.02860.pdf


Quote from that paper:

> The Battle of Austerlitz was the decisive French victory against Napoleon

It didn't even catch that Napoleon was the leader of the French as described in the source snippet. And this was when it just generated text of similar size as the input. Based on just that paper I highly doubt that this method will generalize to creating entire books.


"he was still in conflict with Emperor Napoleon, the French Republic’s king"


My point was that the text lacked coherence, that quote only makes it worse. If it can't even keep coherence for a single page how would it manage for a hundred?


by improving metrics over time

see, e.g., https://gluebenchmark.com/leaderboard/


Oh fuck, I am banned here from getting points. Time to avoid selling my own profile to whoever sniff on HN users.


You're not banned here.


Glad to find they used something from my research. Don't want to disclose more, was flagged too much.


I guess you are not from the field.

Edit: I was right, he is an engineer and not a researcher who is active in the field.


Please don't make personal dismissals. That's not in the spirit of this site, and we already had to ask you about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21615955.

Instead, if you know more, share some of what you know. Then we all can learn something.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


Especially since I do have a background in AI and machine learning.


[flagged]


Care to link the papers that makes you so sure that we will soon be able to generate whole coherent books? As far as we know you could just be an enthusiastic college student who knows nothing.


[flagged]


"You're confusing X with Y" uses a personal pronoun but I don't think I'd call it a personal attack—it's a common phrase in spoken English. Maybe "That's confusing X with Y" would be a modicum more polite, but only a modicum.

Please stop these low-information, bilious comments now. It's not contributing positively to sniff at others' lack of credentials and tout yourself. Experts are welcome here if they want to share their expertise, but just being dismissive isn't a good thing for any HN user to do, expert or no.


You talk as if you have information to share, why don't you share it?


If you think A and I think B, I am allowed to say B without proving it to you. You can say that my claim is unsupported but by insulting me in a parallel thread you learn nothing. Be open-minded and assume that what you see in open is not everything primarily due to different compute capabilities available to different actors.


[flagged]


Above, AlexCoventry mentioned a paper. If you would like to find more, go to Google Scholar and find all papers which cite that paper. This would be just a part of the whole story since bigger datasets and models are not in open. The progress rate in this field is incredible.


Quote from that paper:

> The Battle of Austerlitz was the decisive French victory against Napoleon

It didn't even catch that Napoleon was the leader of the French. And this was when it just generated text of similar size as the input. Based on just that paper I highly doubt that this method will generalize to creating entire books.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: