Those are drawbacks

SOURCE: LAWS OF PHYSICS

Your “probably not” argument gets thinner every major AI update.

Right, but I’m talking about whether they’re already using it, not whether they will in the future. It’s certainly interesting to speculate about it though. I don’t think we really know for sure how good it will get, and how fast.

Something interesting that’s come up is scaling laws. Compute, dataset size, and parameters so far appear to create a limit to how low the error rate can go, regardless of the model’s architecture. And dataset size and model size appear to require being scaled up in tandem to avoid over-/under-fitting. It’s possible, although not guaranteed, that we’re discovering fundamental laws about pattern recognition. Or maybe it’s just an issue with our current approach.

Alphago was designed entirely within the universe of Go. It is fundamentally tied to the game; a game with simple rules and nothing but rule-following patterns to analyze. So it can make good go moves, because it has been trained on good go moves. Or self-trained using a simulated game maybe, idk how they trained it.

ChatGPT is trained the same way, but on human speech. It is very, very good at writing human speech. This requires it to be able to mimick our speech patterns, which means its mimickry will resemble coherent thought, but it’s not. In short, ChatGPT is not trained to make political decisions. If you’ve seen the paper where they ask it to run a vending machine company, you can see some of the issues with trying to force it to make real-world decisions like running a political campaign.

You could train an AI specifically to make political campaign decisions, but I’m not aware of a good dataset you could use for it.

Could AI have been used to help run a campaign? Yes. Would it have been better than humans doing it? Probably not.

The AI isn’t helping much, but there’s also no resistance, so… rip.

Please read the rest of the comment

Bro found the block button

Your points don’t get better just because you coined/found a new term

Seems reasonable to me

All I can do is laugh, and I intend to do it heartily

Her name was Susan or did she not change it?

Dweezil is an amazing name

I made both claims actually. So despite the authors of the document working in Trump’s highest advisory roles, you think that it’s not the plan? Ok, what is his plan then? Because he seems to be following P25 fairly well for something that’s supposedly not his plan.

Life must be so easy when you can just call anything you don’t like bias. I made a specific claim: Six of Trump’s cabinet secretaries authored or contributed to Project 2025. This is easily verifiable with any source you want to use. But it’s easier to just ignore that, huh?

Delusional

Really? Why?

Really? I’ve never heard just GSM.

Prove it, I did.

I’m a fan of it but it doesn’t seem widely known. Maybe we should spread the word.

Yeah, a conflict that we weren’t directly involved in