←back to thread

688 points crescit_eundo | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
swiftcoder ◴[] No.42144784[source]
I feel like the article neglects one obvious possibility: that OpenAI decided that chess was a benchmark worth "winning", special-cases chess within gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct, and then neglected to add that special-case to follow-up models since it wasn't generating sustained press coverage.
replies(8): >>42145306 #>>42145352 #>>42145619 #>>42145811 #>>42145883 #>>42146777 #>>42148148 #>>42151081 #
scott_w ◴[] No.42145811[source]
I suspect the same thing. Rather than LLMs “learning to play chess,” they “learnt” to recognise a chess game and hand over instructions to a chess engine. If that’s the case, I don’t feel impressed at all.
replies(5): >>42146086 #>>42146152 #>>42146383 #>>42146415 #>>42156785 #
fires10 ◴[] No.42146086[source]
Recognize and hand over to a specialist engine? That might be useful for AI. Maybe I am missing something.
replies(5): >>42146145 #>>42146293 #>>42146329 #>>42147558 #>>42151536 #
nerdponx ◴[] No.42146329[source]
It is and would be useful, but it would be quite a big lie to the public, but more importantly to paying customers, and even more importantly to investors.
replies(1): >>42148826 #
1. anon84873628 ◴[] No.42148826[source]
The problem is simply that the company has not been open about how it works, so we're all just speculating here.