Comments
FogletGilet t1_iwmbwqi wrote
Great now all those fake open access publishers will stop spamming us to write articles for them.
Ancient-Sense-2022 t1_iwmdx42 wrote
The problem, is not that the programmers have the ability to make a computer or a machine to do amazing things. It is that once a while, an ignorant programmer with a big ego, thinks the Science is so easy to do.
Image if I think of myself as programer because I “Programed” the time in the toaster’s clock.
101forgotmypassword t1_iwmegmd wrote
Nah, that will never happen... Now let me get back to my life hack videos.
FuturologyBot t1_iwmg4nv wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/lughnasadh:
Submission Statement
Someone is going to need to develop a search engine that only references trusted sources of information. An internet populated with useless AI generated text will be a waste of time. What is the point of searching for science information if all you can find is useless garbage like this?
AI generated content is so easy to create we will soon reach a point where it outnumbers human content. One day, perhaps not long after, it will vastly outnumber human content. All while being full of mistakes, errors and misinformation.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/yx1hzw/meta_has_released_a_new_ai_tool_called_galactica/iwmb3yw/
thinkB4WeSpeak t1_iwmmpvw wrote
If only academic articles were already free instead of having a bunch of journals making a monopoly/oligopoly out of them. I think that would do better than this and have all the info people need.
professormunchies t1_iwmouhm wrote
Already working on it ;)
Alantsu t1_iwmoxf7 wrote
Oh maybe we can like charge them a fee for a blue check mark to prove your not an AI… how’s $8 sound?
EOlson76 t1_iwmpgqa wrote
Couldn't agree more - this what we are trying to build at Consensus
We show 0 ads, search only over peer-reviewed documents and use extractive AI - not generative
Think of the results like a list of featured snippets from research papers
Try it out: What is the impact of climate change on GDP?
We just launched six weeks ago and it is completely free to sign-up
Winter-Coffin t1_iwmqt3o wrote
you have a toaster with a clock?
ButterflyCatastrophe t1_iwmr4ov wrote
Sounds more like a turbo encabulator generator than a science generator.
Gagarin1961 t1_iwmrgrg wrote
“Then the only escape will be the virtual world we control!”
Mirabolis t1_iwmrwqf wrote
META’s long term goal to build the “internet of garbage.”
yaosio t1_iwmssrj wrote
All current language models mimic their input. If you say "there's bears in space" the language model will agree that there are bears in space because it's continuing the text as if you were writing it. You can think of a language model as an extension of whatever is typed into it. You can't use current language models for factual knowledge because they're not designed to output facts, they're designed to estimate what the next token should be when given input.
[deleted] t1_iwmtkhf wrote
[removed]
Ancient-Sense-2022 t1_iwmu6tn wrote
No, I do not have one, but I have seeing them.
nothing5901568 t1_iwn6s0s wrote
I tried it. The outputs are pretty bad. I think the concept is good though, it just needs more work. As for the idea that this will cause a lot of societal harm, I doubt it.
Kinross19 t1_iwncooy wrote
How could this ever go bad?
How should I mix bleach and ammonia to make an effective cleaner?
Kinross19 t1_iwne8w8 wrote
Kinross19 t1_iwnf665 wrote
Get your gallon of water ready for kitchen fires:
Kinross19 t1_iwnfwz3 wrote
Remember to smoke safely:
Kinross19 t1_iwngx15 wrote
The road salt industry is a lie!
PumpkinImportant3282 t1_iwngxri wrote
fuck zuckerberg and everything he does. could be great, don't care. fuck zuckerberg.
Yadona t1_iwnje92 wrote
I just used the AI and searched a couple of terms and so far it's actually pretty cool. Except it doesn't give you the research paper. It does more of a summary of it so wishes and testing are left out as far as I experienced. Promising but it just felt like googling a term.
xXAridTrashXx t1_iwnoq0x wrote
Awesome more misinformation tools to filter through. Programmers in 2040 are going to fucking hate us.
Kflynn1337 t1_iwo6gq2 wrote
They're not being paid by the Republicans are they?
3d-print-struggler t1_iwo6lbg wrote
Open the pod bay doors
Transfotaku t1_iwoctkf wrote
Their stocks have been dropping hard, hopefully, that trend continues, ever quicker, and that shithole rots in the sewers it belongs in.
Three_hrs_later t1_iwog1x5 wrote
I like it! Thanks for sharing your work, I hope it takes off.
TheGeofoam t1_iwoim5z wrote
Sample output:
The molecule in R2, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, is seen to counteract consectetur adipiscing elit.
wolfobert t1_iwovnsg wrote
Proof of the farting conjecture https://galactica.org/?prompt=proof+of+the+farting+conjecture&max_new_tokens=400
Rogaar t1_iwownxv wrote
OP are you being serious or sarcastic in your statement about someone needing to develop a search engine that only references trusted source of information.
If you are being serious, have I got news for you. It's called Google Scholar.
The only results you get through that are peer reviewed documents.
ExcitedGirl t1_iwp09om wrote
META needs to die before it becomes invasive and pervasive.
BassmanBiff t1_iwp4q37 wrote
> United Airlines dispatcher Susan B. Anthony
BassmanBiff t1_iwp54s3 wrote
The problem is that a lot of the stuff it does give you is straight up wrong, and you have no way to know which parts that is. It's just formatted such that it looks convincing.
United-Reputation773 t1_iwp7as9 wrote
Sup ,my dawg how are you hope you are doing good!
spinur1848 t1_iwpp59k wrote
It's not likely that a simple language model can reliably do this task.
It is essentially a parrot with a large memory. It is predicting what words and sentences are associated with the input you give it.
The problem is that published scientific literature is frequently wrong, or only true for a short period of time, or only true in a very narrow context that is not captured in the language.
For example if you ask it if hydroxchloroquine is an effective treatment for Covid-19, it tells you about the preliminary work that proposed this idea and not the more recent clinical trials that completely debunked this.
You are actually leading it to a particular conclusion with your sentence structure. There actually is scientific literature that tries to suggest that hydroxchloroquine can treat Covid-19. The most recent, more reputable studies that disprove this don't have language that suggests hydroxchloroquine treats Covid-19, so the algorithm doesn't pick them up.
Essentially what Meta has done here is create an algorithm that emulates what non-scientist anti-vaxxers do when they "do thier own research". It finds and amplifies text that reinforces the biases and expectations of the input.
That's not what the practice of science is.
spinur1848 t1_iwppf11 wrote
Search for "Can ivermectin prevent Covid-19?"
(It can't)
Pbleadhead t1_iwqct9k wrote
"Results indicate that overall implications of climate change on GDP growth are relatively small to 2050, but the losses from climate change tend to increase over time, suggesting that impacts may become larger post 20150."
hmmm. Ill be real. I hope we are all off the planet by then.
zakaria-bouguira t1_ix184ug wrote
I'm in love with what you have done.
TheDirichlet t1_ixdc10g wrote
Did anyone managed to run it from github of papers with code (link not included on purpose) after they disabled it ?
lughnasadh OP t1_iwmb3yw wrote
Submission Statement
Someone is going to need to develop a search engine that only references trusted sources of information. An internet populated with useless AI generated text will be a waste of time. What is the point of searching for science information if all you can find is useless garbage like this?
AI generated content is so easy to create we will soon reach a point where it outnumbers human content. One day, perhaps not long after, it will vastly outnumber human content. All while being full of mistakes, errors and misinformation.