This summary seems mostly correct and maybe Iâd give it like a B or B+. You can read this and decide whether you want to dig into the whole post.
Itâs interesting to notice the details that SummaryBot gets wrong â there arenât âbillionsâ of LLM users (and I didnât say there were).
SummaryBot also sort of improvises the objection about âstatic datasetsâ, which is not something I explicitly raised. My approach in the post was actually just to say, okay, letâs assume AI systems could continually learn from new data or experience coming in in real time. In that case, their data efficiency would be far too low and their generalization would be far too poor to make them actually competent (in the way humans are competent) at most of the tasks or occupations that humans do that we might want to automate or might want to test AIâs capabilities against. Itâs kind of funny that SummaryBot gets its hand on the ball and adds its own ideas to the mix.
This summary seems mostly correct and maybe Iâd give it like a B or B+. You can read this and decide whether you want to dig into the whole post.
Itâs interesting to notice the details that SummaryBot gets wrong â there arenât âbillionsâ of LLM users (and I didnât say there were).
SummaryBot also sort of improvises the objection about âstatic datasetsâ, which is not something I explicitly raised. My approach in the post was actually just to say, okay, letâs assume AI systems could continually learn from new data or experience coming in in real time. In that case, their data efficiency would be far too low and their generalization would be far too poor to make them actually competent (in the way humans are competent) at most of the tasks or occupations that humans do that we might want to automate or might want to test AIâs capabilities against. Itâs kind of funny that SummaryBot gets its hand on the ball and adds its own ideas to the mix.