The AI hype reminds me of the Y2K scare. BUT,
I’ve used it for writing articles, it is amazing!
Recall the voice recognition system’s?
Dragon System
All running to capture/be the market leader.
And today!
The AI market could evolve like the voice recognition software market - I’m not very familiar with that market, nor with Dragon Systems (I think thats consumer oriented isn’t it?)… Here is one market share breakout I saw on that market… I wouldn’t be surprised to see the AI market evolve similarly.
Consumer and professional
Also Medical and engineering
And government agencies
I use Dragon Medical for transcription daily, it’s very error-prone, and you must double-check it thoroughly, but I create long narratives. Grammarly catches many errors (and also makes them). Imagine excellent transcription software coupled with a real-time AI; it might end up predicting fairly accurately what I am going to say next. I am pretty certain 2023 is going to be the year AI takes a quantum leap. My advice is to adapt and learn to use AI to our advantage, but don’t surrender to it.
4 Likes
Sky net. That’s all I gave to say about AI.
3 Likes
I did more different tests and not as optimistic as the author portrayed even though it seems the diagnosis process was more similar - inaccurate results and making stuff up. I suspect the author, which appears to be a medical student, doesn’t have a CS & ML/NLP type of “AI” background, so may have interpreted the results too optimistically and used a methodology that may have not been targeted towards more accurate testing, on top of perhaps a lack of clinical experience to get enough context on what the applications are. I would note it’s likely mnemonics would be a great option though. It’s just that even errata in textbooks can happen fairly often (when I was younger and slightly more petty, I’d actually pick out First Aid errata to prove how some of these “shortcut” texts weren’t all that great) let alone internet sources, so ChatGPT in medical education seems like a bad idea for now until there is more accuracy than current standard “shortcut” texts and the far more dense standard medical texts that one would expect for someone to really drill in depth.
Also, keep in mind the USMLE exam is not quite simple - it had about the same accuracy as PubMedGPT before, and even if they did random spot checking to reduce the risk of it simply copying answers from questions - a lot of high similarity or paraphrased clinical vignettes which may prompt the answer are actually available on the internet as practice questions, especially I suspect recently that may be the case. It’s not surprising that the average USMLE scores have gone up over time as students are just spamming qbanks such as UWorld, rather than starting with say “Big Robbins” and all the other generally recommended (and extremely dense) textbooks to get all the pathology details with full understanding, and I don’t blame them - it’s a lot of material to be frank and it requires 80+ hours per week level dedication on average. I suspect many students these days will put true understanding for the backburner during med school years until they catch up later.
The “shortcut” to medical education that is generally heavily discouraged by professors are just keep doing practice questions. But likely not happening from small sample surveying.
Even then with such benchmark testing and assuming ChatGPT actually had some improved model somehow compared to PubMedGPT despite lack of specific model training, “within passing threshold” is actually not particularly impressive. Basically 99% pass rate unless they didn’t study for US MD grads, slightly less for everyone else. Basically “within passing” for Step 1 and Step 2 these days could mean somewhere between a lack of residency options and the rare flunking out of school.
I’ll also mention I can probably get the answers to “barely pass” medical boards from Google if I didn’t study at all at the time and had unlimited time to take the exam. So again, it’s actually not super impressive to me as opposed to random people. Although this is somewhat off-topic - I can see why Alphabet’s CEO appears to be kinda worried overall when it comes to ChatGPT in general since they probably can’t greenlight their LLM as quick due to concerns of misinformation and reputation risk. Frankly, I wonder whether TikTok should be more concerning to them despite apparent regulatory pressure, as Google’s LLM seems to be doing alright relatively speaking.
1 Like
There is also the huge issue of how do you monetize AI generated responses. A large part of the market may go to verbal searches on mobile, or even if its an AI generated text response on desktop (similar to ChatGPT) to a question, it doesn’t lend itself much to people clicking on ads… so its in Google’s interest to slow down the adoption of AI-based search as much as possible, to slow the negative impact on their revenue/profits.
2 Likes
I have no idea how they’re planning to exactly monetize but my current working hypothesis is Google does a lot of things for free to lock people in their ecosystem and suck up as much personal data as possible when they keep within it - which is used for ad revenue as you know. The ads don’t have to be initially on the LLM part until it’s clear they’re going to blow competitors away. Google has done just fine with ads on other websites from the start.
Subjectively, I feel Google’s search result quality has been deteriorating (partly from higher quality being unprofitable and aggressive SEO optimization) but not yet to the point where people will stop using Google.
Hence, if people find a much much better option for “discovery” - they may use something else as their “search”. I’m aware of several search engine startups including a few stealth ones with limited public information. I don’t think DuckDuckGo or Bing really are going to take much of Google and it’s hard to tell for startups in general. I don’t know for sure - but I think ChatGPT is what they should not be concerned about so far and there will be a slightly clearer picture when Google releases their LLM. I doubt ChatGPT is anywhere near 10x better than Google’s LLM.
If one uses Google’s LLM instead of ChatGPT - they could suck in more user data which would be used for ad revenue presumably. I believe recalling the founders once considered starting a hedge fund, but decided ultimately against it due to regulatory issues and ads were a much better biz model for them.
Very good point here.
They’re offering ChatGPT Plus for$20 a month. Am considering it, event though I have no intended use yet. I have made more foolish purchases. I do not know if I can get into the waitlist.
Maybe like L_Hayes says, order it (if that can be done) to source its opinion/answers only from peer-reviewed publications.
1 Like
This is what I am using; I have spent 0.28 $ these last two months and have been able to ask as many questions as I desired. Sometimes it makes up things that are not true.
4 Likes
I think that’s GPT-3, if you haven’t tried ChatGPT, although it is based on GPT-3 it is more natural and can feel like a conversation. It’s free, you can sign up with a google account. I haven’t tried GPT-3 much so I don’t know the differences in detail however.
This is how the interface looks like when you’ve signed in:
It’s organized in conversations, in which the AI remembers everything in the conversation and can use it for follow up questions, etc.
4 Likes
Existence is changing in real time before your eyes.
“Truth will always be truth, regardless of lack of understanding, disbelief or ignorance.”
~ W. Clement Stone
1 Like
Twitter threads are showing many examples of the extreme bias Chat GPT has concerning, race, politics, economy, etc.
The examples many are showing are not a matter of debate.
I only use ChatGPT to point me toward information that is otherwise difficult to obtain.
All replies by ChatGPT need to be fact-checked before using the information.
In addition, ChatGPT often tacks on preachy advice that was not asked for.
While ChatGPT can do some amazing things, the programmers need to forgo their own biases.
3 Likes
Is anyone free of bias? There will always be people with different perspectives on this.
1 Like
Yes - the potential for major impacts on employment is definitely there.
It seems that over the next decade the progress in longevity science (extending healthy lifespans) and AI (changing employment trends significantly) may both have significant impact in the world soon. The key will how we work to maximize the “positives” of these technologies, while minimizing the “negatives”; unintended consequences and second order effects.
In the next five years, it is likely that AI will begin to reduce employment for college-educated workers. As the technology continues to advance, it will be able to perform tasks that were previously thought to require a high level of education and skill. This could lead to a displacement of workers in certain industries, as companies look to cut costs by automating processes. While it is difficult to predict the exact extent of this trend, it is clear that AI will have a significant impact on the job market for college-educated workers. It will be important for individuals to stay up to date on the latest developments in AI and to consider how their skills and expertise can be leveraged in a world where machines are increasingly able to perform many tasks.
1 Like
Do you say everyone has a bias? True, but some more than others.
We are going to be funneled down into rabbit holes of biased results.
Google is biased.
ChatGPT is biased.
Certainly, Baidu’s entree will be biased.
The whole covid thing proves we should be extremely skeptical of everything we hear on the news left or right.
Of the three Google, is in my opinion, the least politically or socially biased of the three. Google’s main agenda is just to make money and seems to want to steer you towards whatever is the most lucrative for them.
“Two months after OpenAI’s ChatGPT set the internet ablaze, China’s search engine behemoth, Baidu, is aiming to launch its own artificial intelligence chatbot”
5 Likes
I have posted before, the race is on for who/which will become the “defacto standard” of AI.
And there will be more contenders.
You do not think Yandex will join the party?
1 Like