I think skepticism is always welcome and we should continue to explore what LLM's can and cannot do. However, what I'm referring to is trying to get a quick win by defeating some inferior version of GPT or trying to apply a test which you don't even expect most humans to pass.
The article is actually fine and pretty balanced, but it is a bit unfortunate that 80% of their examples are not illustrative of current capabilities. At least for me, most of my optimism about the utility of LLM's comes from GPT-4 specifically.
The article is actually fine and pretty balanced, but it is a bit unfortunate that 80% of their examples are not illustrative of current capabilities. At least for me, most of my optimism about the utility of LLM's comes from GPT-4 specifically.