"Here is a challenge, designed to be unsolvable or so. We'll give you a bazillion dollars if you complete the challenge, and, in the meantime, we will use your attempts to train an as AI that will be worth the cost!!"
In the most charitable interpretation of this comment - I can understand the feeling, when so much of social media interactions are in the form 'It's post a picture of you as a baby, 10 year old, and current age!'. Those and many other instances can bring out excessive skepticism
But the people involved in this haven't signaled that they are in that path, either in the message about the challenge (precisely the opposite) or seemingly in their careers so far
So I guess I don't share the concern but a better way to phrase your comment could be -
"how can we be sure the human-provided solutions won't turn out to be just fodder for training a RL model or something that will later be monetized, closed and proprietary? Do the challenge organizers provide any guarantees on that?"
No, you missed the point. The striking thing about ARC is the puzzles are super easy, for humans. The average person solves 85% of the tasks, but the worlds best LLMs are only solving 5%. The challenge is to simply make an AI score as well as the average human.
gota|1 year ago
But the people involved in this haven't signaled that they are in that path, either in the message about the challenge (precisely the opposite) or seemingly in their careers so far
So I guess I don't share the concern but a better way to phrase your comment could be -
"how can we be sure the human-provided solutions won't turn out to be just fodder for training a RL model or something that will later be monetized, closed and proprietary? Do the challenge organizers provide any guarantees on that?"
geor9e|1 year ago
ECCME|1 year ago
[deleted]
skrebbel|1 year ago
ECCME|1 year ago
Human: "They're quite challenging, this might be a trick to engage activity for the purpose of training models."
skrebbel: "You're stupid".