upvote

points

by Morromist1 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby enos_feedler1 hours ago|
next
[-]
AI has deeply changed the way I think, feel and act around a computer. In the same way that dialing into the internet changed things for me. Since using ChatGPT the first time until now I have never cared once to look at these pelicans on bikes people seem to get hung up about. It could never have been a thing and nothing would change. See the forest through the trees.
reply
upvoteby Demiurge32 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
What you’re saying is that you’re not interested in benchmarks. But then you go a step further and state that this particular benchmark is entirely inconsequential. That’s like telling you that if you didn’t exist, nothing would change. Even if that were true, it would still be an insensitive and rude thing to say, wouldn’t it?
reply
upvoteby Buttons84018 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
It's okay to be rude to benchmarks though, they don't have feelings.
reply
upvoteby w4yai1 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
> I haven't really seen evidence that any ai can reliably draw a pelican riding a bicycle

Please remember, we've started from there :

https://simonwillison.net/2024/Oct/25/pelicans-on-a-bicycle/

When it started, it was clear what LLM would stand out, its style, etc. Nowadays, the pelicans look similar, the difference is in details and sometimes hard to catch. Sure, the task is not completed perfectly, but that's not the point. It was supposed to be a benchmark to quickly benchmark a LLM against others.

reply
upvoteby techpression42 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
When is it ever hard to catch?
reply
upvoteby reaperducer1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Sure, the task is not completed perfectly, but that's not the point.

Isn't it?

If the computer can't do it better than a human being, then what's the point?

Being wrong at scale is not better than being right.

reply
upvoteby Buttons84015 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Hugely profitable companies leak half the nation's personal data every month. Tell me more about how being wrong at scale is not valuable.
reply
upvoteby matthewfcarlson47 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Many humans would struggle with this even with very good tooling (ie not writing raw svg and using illustrator). I struggle to draw a bicycle accurately. But yes, I suspect it will be diminishing returns and I doubt it will ever be perfect due to the average nature of AI but I’d like to be wrong.
reply
upvoteby nemothekid45 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
>If the computer can't do it better than a human being, then what's the point?

Because the benchmark wasn't testing "can an LLM draw a pelican like a human". The original article was testing the relative capabilities between LLMs. Now that LLMs can all draw pelicans all similarly, the test is less interesting as a comparative benchmark.

reply
upvoteby reaperducer32 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Trillions of dollars spent. Trillions of gigawatts consumed. And people still celebrate "Yay! We're less wrong than the other guys!"

This is what the tech industry has become?

Less of a failure is still failure.

reply
upvoteby valesco16 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
That is the software industry. Our product is less bugged than our competitor’s.
reply
upvoteby paulddraper16 minutes ago|
prev|
[-]
Pelicans don't ride bicycles.

It's physically impossible.

The problem is to draw it in the least disturbing way possible.

reply