thirdwave

Github Mirror

Week 26

Gary Marcus, The Guardian: "When billion-dollar AIs break down over puzzles a child can do, it’s time to rethink the hype.. A research paper by Apple has taken the tech world by storm, all but eviscerating the popular notion that large language models (LLMs, and their newest variant, LRMs, large reasoning models) are able to reason reliably...

The Tower of Hanoi is a classic game with three pegs and multiple discs, in which you need to move all the discs on the left peg to the right peg, never stacking a larger disc on top of a smaller one. With practice, though, a bright (and patient) seven-year-old can do it.

What Apple found was that leading generative models could barely do seven discs, getting less than 80% accuracy, and pretty much can’t get scenarios with eight discs correct at all. It is truly embarrassing that LLMs cannot reliably solve Hanoi.

And, as the paper’s co-lead-author Iman Mirzadeh told me via DM, 'it’s not just about ‘solving’ the puzzle. We have an experiment where we give the solution algorithm to the model, and [the model still failed] … based on what we observe from their thoughts, their process is not logical and intelligent'"


We can see the depths of the state is good, it is the surface that is rotten. Four star generals, congressmen, the executive can all be bought, or can slave themselves to the profit motive of the complex. Money drives things in America. In the Iraq case, intel did its job, but a group at the top headed by Cheney, FORMER CEO OF HALIBURTON, ignored or sometimes worked to promote faulty intel.


Mother Jones: "The intelligence assessments that suggested Iraq possessed significant amounts of WMDs and was close to developing a nuclear weapon—produced under tremendous pressure from the Bush White House — were often disputed by experts within the intelligence community... Meanwhile, they issued overwrought statements about the supposed threat from Iraq that either were unsupported by the faulty intelligence or utterly baseless. In short, Bush and Cheney did lie, and those that marched with them toward war were part of a campaign deliberately fueled with falsehoods. (At one point, Bush even discussed with British Prime Minister Tony Blair concocting a phony provocation that could be used to start the war.)...

In March 2003, Cheney insisted that Saddam had a 'long-standing relationship' with al Qaeda. The intelligence did not show any of this; no 'bullet-proof' evidence was ever revealed. Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were making it all up. As the 9/11 Commission later noted, there had been no intelligence confirming significant contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda. Here was another instance in which Bush and Cheney were not misled by flawed intelligence; they were promoting false information."


Intel did not provide fauly info.. decision makers did their funky business bcz they wanted war.


Some see similarities to the Iraq debacle, the intel, war/peace decision..