AI

YorVikIng said

I guess you've chosen to use an old version rather than ChatGPT-4o ?

im unable to access 4o yet, ive tried but it wont allow me, but i don't pay for plus or anything

Edited by ANDY00

I also don't pay, but maybe I was just being lucky.

Hopefully you get allowed on soon - not that I can see any immediate difference, but I guess we all like the newest and shinest toy in the box :)

Edited by YorVikIng

ANDY00 he put up the money. He’s not doing the research!

Unfocussed Mike said

ANDY00 he put up the money. He’s not doing the research!

He is, he has his own platform as well xai, plus his autonomous bot uses it, plus his tesla cars use ai , plus dozen of other platforms developed by his companies for space x developments among many others, hes had a huge part to do with the development whether you like him or not lol 

ANDY00 Musk is a CEO. A distracted, opportunistic, bloviating CEO. I would not take his claims or predictions as based on science. Just the need for investment, grants, bailouts and government contracts.

For that matter I wouldn’t listen to Sam Altman either; he’s enormously overrated.

All bold claims about the progress of artificial general intelligence have always been wrong. There’s no real reason to believe current predictions are any better.

Unfocussed Mike said

ANDY00 Musk is a CEO. A distracted, opportunistic, bloviating CEO. I would not take his claims or predictions as based on science. Just the need for investment, grants, bailouts and government contracts.

For that matter I wouldn’t listen to Sam Altman either; he’s enormously overrated.

All bold claims about the progress of artificial general intelligence have always been wrong. There’s no real reason to believe current predictions are any better.

So what you're saying is that if I want to get any information about the development of AI, I should not listen to the people developing AI? Hmm, you do understand how that sounds? I mean, seriously, people say I'm a conspiracist because I believe AI has advanced,- which it has, but a statement like that is not conspiracy? seems a lot like it tbh, its in these companies best interests not to inflate the reality, not to mention they will be under massive scrutiny by gov agencies for safety reasons and military for military applications and security so i would imagine it would be incredibly difficult for them to lie publicly without someone correcting them pretty fast. i would imagine there will be a lot of advances in the tech they cant even discuss with the military and national security being part of the conversation,

Edited by ANDY00

ANDY00 I am saying that if you want to understand it properly, you should tune out the CEOs and actually look at the research.

Re: lies:

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-lists/elon-musk-twitter-zuckerberg-lies-1234808808/

Edited by Unfocussed Mike

Unfocussed Mike Rolling Stones magazine has been successfully sued many times for (lying) and misinformation to sell magazines I mean come on - you say don’t believe ceos because they have reason to lie and use a magazine known for lying to sell copies as example I should listen to 🙂 lol

ANDY00 said

Unfocussed Mike said

ANDY00 Musk is a CEO. A distracted, opportunistic, bloviating CEO. I would not take his claims or predictions as based on science. Just the need for investment, grants, bailouts and government contracts.

For that matter I wouldn’t listen to Sam Altman either; he’s enormously overrated.

All bold claims about the progress of artificial general intelligence have always been wrong. There’s no real reason to believe current predictions are any better.

So what you're saying is that if I want to get any information about the development of AI, I should not listen to the people developing AI? Hmm, you do understand how that sounds? I mean, seriously, people say I'm a conspiracist because I believe AI has advanced,- which it has, but a statement like that is not conspiracy? seems a lot like it tbh, its in these companies best interests not to inflate the reality, not to mention they will be under massive scrutiny by gov agencies for safety reasons and military for military applications and security so i would imagine it would be incredibly difficult for them to lie publicly without someone correcting them pretty fast. i would imagine there will be a lot of advances in the tech they cant even discuss with the military and national security being part of the conversation,

Edited by ANDY00

You've mentioned military / national security a number of times - just like there are a number of different AI systems for medical research, the military will have it's own AI systems - they're not using Midjourney or ChatGBT, so the scrutiny you believe exists is looking elsewhere.

Jonathan C said

ANDY00 said

Unfocussed Mike said

ANDY00 Musk is a CEO. A distracted, opportunistic, bloviating CEO. I would not take his claims or predictions as based on science. Just the need for investment, grants, bailouts and government contracts.

For that matter I wouldn’t listen to Sam Altman either; he’s enormously overrated.

All bold claims about the progress of artificial general intelligence have always been wrong. There’s no real reason to believe current predictions are any better.

So what you're saying is that if I want to get any information about the development of AI, I should not listen to the people developing AI? Hmm, you do understand how that sounds? I mean, seriously, people say I'm a conspiracist because I believe AI has advanced,- which it has, but a statement like that is not conspiracy? seems a lot like it tbh, its in these companies best interests not to inflate the reality, not to mention they will be under massive scrutiny by gov agencies for safety reasons and military for military applications and security so i would imagine it would be incredibly difficult for them to lie publicly without someone correcting them pretty fast. i would imagine there will be a lot of advances in the tech they cant even discuss with the military and national security being part of the conversation,

Edited by ANDY00

You've mentioned military / national security a number of times - just like there are a number of different AI systems for medical research, the military will have it's own AI systems - they're not using Midjourney or ChatGBT, so the scrutiny you believe exists is looking elsewhere.

open ai is working with DARPA and receives military funding that is why i mentioned it, this is public knowledge, ive no doubt the military has off book research going on as well but it will also be curating public research and utilizing civil programmers as well

ANDY00 Elizabeth Holmes wants you to invest in TheranosAI.

CEOs have one motivation, and that’s to increase their wealth.

Russ Freeman

“Holmes wants you to invest in TheranosAI.”

😂😂😂😅

Russ Freeman CEO’s want to make money therefore everthing they say is a lie ? So why would I believe you aren’t you a ceo ? Are you lying 🤣

ANDY00 if I had a competing product then you should be suspicious of my motives for laughing and poking fun at people who claim we have AI.

Also, making money and increasing wealth are not the same things.

But don’t trust me on it, Google is your friends….if you can trust it.

I think, if we referred to the current fancy algorithms as Eh-eye, then less people would feel scammed by it when trying to ask Siri a complex question like What is the minimum number of bananas to make a bunch?