Wait, so the founder of Anthropic is "Amodei," as in "loves god"?
And he leads Anthropic, meaning "human-centered," which is being used in military strikes?
And the creator of ChatGPT is "Altman," as in "an alternative to humans"?
And he leads OpenAI, which is completely closed?
And then there's "Gemini," meaning "two-faced," from a company that promised to do no evil?
And the whole global AI arms race is being driven by people who claimed to be worried about AGI taking over the world?
Either the universe is an extremely cliché writer, or has a brilliant sense of humor
Many thoughtful people get destabilized by deep questions of science & philosophy - what are the implications for how to live life? Here, my 2 simplistic flowcharts that I created during home study units with my kids. Good news: no matter the answers, the To-Do item is same.
"The best that most of us can hope to achieve in physics is simply to misunderstand at a deeper level." – Wolfgang Pauli, pioneer of quantum physics and Nobel Laureate, seen here with Albert Einstein. (via @bgreene)
# On the "hallucination problem"
I always struggle a bit with I'm asked about the "hallucination problem" in LLMs. Because, in some sense, hallucination is all LLMs do. They are dream machines.
We direct their dreams with prompts. The prompts start the dream, and based on the LLM's hazy recollection of its training documents, most of the time the result goes someplace useful.
It's only when the dreams go into deemed factually incorrect territory that we label it a "hallucination". It looks like a bug, but it's just the LLM doing what it always does.
At the other end of the extreme consider a search engine. It takes the prompt and just returns one of the most similar "training documents" it has in its database, verbatim. You could say that this search engine has a "creativity problem" - it will never respond with something new. An LLM is 100% dreaming and has the hallucination problem. A search engine is 0% dreaming and has the creativity problem.
All that said, I realize that what people *actually* mean is they don't want an LLM Assistant (a product like ChatGPT etc.) to hallucinate. An LLM Assistant is a lot more complex system than just the LLM itself, even if one is at the heart of it. There are many ways to mitigate hallcuinations in these systems - using Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) to more strongly anchor the dreams in real data through in-context learning is maybe the most common one. Disagreements between multiple samples, reflection, verification chains. Decoding uncertainty from activations. Tool use. All an active and very interesting areas of research.
TLDR I know I'm being super pedantic but the LLM has no "hallucination problem". Hallucination is not a bug, it is LLM's greatest feature. The LLM Assistant has a hallucination problem, and we should fix it.
</rant> Okay I feel much better now :)
Be humble. Be teachable. The universe is bigger than your view of the universe. There's always room for a new idea. Humility is necessary for growth. 🧠
@elonmusk Margaret Hamilton, lead software engineer of the Apollo Project, stands next to a huge stack of code written by her and her team and that was used to take humanity to the moon, 1969.