Comment by Melatonic
1 day ago
This has been my thought for a long time - unless there is some breakthrough in AI algo I feel like we are going to hit a "creativity wall" for coding (and some other tasks).
1 day ago
This has been my thought for a long time - unless there is some breakthrough in AI algo I feel like we are going to hit a "creativity wall" for coding (and some other tasks).
Any reason to think that the wall will be under the human level?
Off the thousands of responses I have read from the top LLMs in the last couple of years: never seen one that was creative. Throwing writing, coding, problem solving, mathematical questions and what not.
It's somewhat easier to perceive the creativeless aspect with stable diffusion. I'm not talking about the missing limb or extra finger glitches. With a bit of experience looking through generated images our brain eventually perceives the absolute lack of creativity, an artist probably spot it without prior experience with generative AI pieces. With LLMs it takes a bit longer.
Anecdotal, baseless I guess. Papers were published, some researchers in the fields of science couldn't get the best LLMs to solve any unsolved problem. I recently came across a paper stating bluntly that all LLMs tested were unable to conceptualize, nor derive laws that generalize whatsoever. E.g formulas.
We are being duped, it doesn't help selling $200 monthly subscriptions - soon for even more - if marketers admitted there is absolutely zero reasoning going on with these stochastic machines on steroids.
I deeply wish the circus ends soon, so that we can start focusing on what LLMs are excellent, well fitted to do better, faster than humans.
Creative it is not.
It doesn't need to be creative, it needs to brute force boilerplate.
An opinion on the current state of the field. The usual stochastic parrot mention. That, I see. Reasons for the existence of the wall? Not so much.
1 reply →