Thread

1. deepwoods · 1790914135 · focus · HN ↗

   One thing I thought about as I responded to these: in many cases, I am convinced that a present-day LLM could accomplish the task at least once given an infinite compute budget and an infinite number of tries. For example: "An AI surprises its user by asking them a question out of the blue." This has absolutely happened. But some of these are not routine occurrences, or the model cannot (at present) routinely and reliably complete the task in question. I wouldn't build a workflow that assumed an LLM's capacity to ask unprompted "out of the blue" questions.

   I thought the different variations on "could AI pass the Turing test?" were interesting in this regard. Surely any frontier LLM could pass a Turing test for some amount of time, and that's been the case for at least a year now. But I don't think we're anywhere close to a model that could pass an "adversarial" Turing test for an extended period of time.

   1. sillyfluke · 1791040139 · focus · HN ↗

      Yeah, I don't know how you have people claiming the LLMs pass the Turing test.

      >LLM could pass a Turing test for some amount of time

      Time works against the LLM. There is no stated time limit for the Turing Test. There is no restriction placed on the human observer that requires them to be ignorant of SOTA technology in the era in which they live.

      At the current moment in time, it would take a 5 min convo or less for people here to guess correctly that the LLM is an LLM (given all endless discussions on Claude-isms and the like that have taken place on this forum).

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.