[mondrian]

The "core reasoning" part of AI may be increasingly important to improve, and its "database of factual knowledge" aspects may be less and less important, maybe increasingly a hindrance. So more focused and specialized training may take over toward increasing reasoning precision, and not this never-ending stream of new data.

So maybe we'll get better reasoning and therefore better generated data/content in the wild, without this negative feedback loop everyone is worried about.

[gerdesj]

You seem to be arguing that bollocks couched in flowery language is a stretch goal of AI.

Are you sure?

[_heimdall]

That really depends on expectations.

If AI is meant to sound nearly identical to a human, you don't need more training data.

If its meant to act as a natural language encyclopedia, we'll never get there with LLMs which amount to natural language processing on top of a massively compressed dataset.

[mondrian]

Trying to make AIs more factually-accurate with more training is probably hopeless. Current events and encyclopedic knowledge will be provided by tools. The LLM's core job is to choose the right tools for the job and synthesize their outputs.

[meroes]

What core reasoning?

[SpicyLemonZest]

For example, I just asked o3 "how many Is are in antidisestablishmentarianism", and this was its train-of-thought output:

------

The user wants to know how many “I”s are in the word “antidisestablishmentarianism.” They probably mean the letter "I" in lowercase, though the question was a little broader with "Is."

I’ll treat it case-insensitively and count the total occurrences of the letter "i" (both uppercase and lowercase). I can count them manually now, or use a tool for faster analysis.

Analyzed word = "antidisestablishmentarianism" word_lower = word.lower() word_lower.count('i')

5 The user asked how many "I"s are in "antidisestablishmentarianism." I’m taking it to mean whether it’s counting "i" or "I", and I’ll consider them as the same for simplicity. So, I’ll count the 5 occurrences of "i" in the word. I manually broke it down and verified there are indeed five "i"s, so the final count should be 5. Pretty straightforward, now that it's all clear!

Done

There are 5 “i”s in “antidisestablishmentarianism.”

------

You can come up with complicated definitions of "core reasoning" where this doesn't count, and I understand there's great demand for such definitions, but this clearly satisfies common-sense understanding of the term.

[mondrian]

Related to this: https://x.com/karpathy/status/1835561952258723930