This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
A big problem is how you measure intelligence.
Any human can count the number of r's in strawberry but most would be hard-pressed to translate Chinese to English or do anything at all in python or other programming languages. Intelligence is multi-domain, possibly the most complicated thing we can try to measure.
Even within domains, how do you rate intelligence? Sometimes it would be worth spending 10x more to get a marginally better programming AI because 'marginally better' is like a 0 to 1 increase in that it provides genuinely useful input that a human can use to get a good answer and speed up their work.
A new brutally hard question set dropped a few days ago. I have no idea what any of this gibberish means, it's well beyond me.
https://epochai.org/frontiermath
The two toned-down o1 models get 1%, along with GPT-4. Claude 3.5 and Gemini Pro get 2%. Does it follow that Claude 3.5 new is smarter than I am since I would get 0 and that therefore AGI has been achieved? Probably not, Sonnet 3.5 makes all kinds of order of magnitude mistakes that I can eyeball as wrong. But it is pretty damn smart and noticeably smarter than its older incarnation, it has certain new tendencies in writing that qualitatively improve it.
GPT-2 would get 0 on nearly all benchmarks because it just babbles. GPT-3 would also get 0 because it just babbles (albeit more interestingly), remember these are the base models that might just answer your question with more questions. GPT-3.5 was the inflection point where AI became useful for a bunch of things, for consumer use. The old GPT-4 (as of March 2023) opened up coding. Opus 3 was thought to be the first really creative writer, it can maintain an engaging twitter persona. Sonnet 3.5 is on a whole new level in coding, opening up Cursor. The newest Sonnet, o1 and Gemini can start to barely grapple with these advanced mathematical questions.
From the perspective of 'can it answer Frontier Math', there have been no advances in AI before the last 6 months or so. Intelligence is so complex, what looks like a slowdown in one domain can just be the start of something new in another domain.
More options
Context Copy link