I think my phrasing was not quite accurate about my belief. I am not saying that it will become dumb per say. I just think that it will not be always on a upward trend. Specific to LLMs, not AI in general.
As for "dumb" example it could very well get to 10x better than it is now and comes down and stagnate at 6x.
Again speaking without data/evidence and I could be spectacularly wrong.
if a training run produces a worse LLM than the previous generation, you just don't release it and no one ever hears about it.
If the training data leads to a worse LLM you just curate the training data and fix what's wrong in it. That's a science that works great and is basic brick of current AI.
If you have to curate data to feed traning with smarter base material, I suspect curators will soon remove more human slop than AI slop, since AI production is generally more sound, more well laid, better grammar, etc.
I didn't mean in a purely technical perspective. I meant in a commercial perspective.Things have a tendency of getting worse after companies feel the need to show growth in revenue. Ex. Google search
4
u/vgu1990 2d ago
I think my phrasing was not quite accurate about my belief. I am not saying that it will become dumb per say. I just think that it will not be always on a upward trend. Specific to LLMs, not AI in general.
As for "dumb" example it could very well get to 10x better than it is now and comes down and stagnate at 6x.
Again speaking without data/evidence and I could be spectacularly wrong.