I know at least one Ph. D. where this could very well be true.
Sam Altman wants to raise babies using AI.
Never forget.
Literally the plot of a Neal Stephenson novel.
And the point was you still needed a fucking parent to turn out sane.
GPT5 was an effort by OpenAI to reduce costs. It is not smarter than the latest GPT4 models.
Because they are unable to make it smarter
If they could have made it smarter they would have
I feel like I’ve been hearing this stupid “PhD level intelligence” claim about every LLM that’s come out since ChatGPT was first released, including GPT-3.0 which it launched with. It kind of amazes me that people keep falling for it and not questioning how the new model having “PhD level intelligence” is both a true claim and also noteworthy when the claim is made about every new model.
It will analyze and parse primary sources with all the discernment of a pure math PhD! Design bridges with all the insight of a literature PhD! Diagnose medical problems with all the experience of a supreme court justice!
Iv met enough phd holders to know that they can and frequently are still unabashedly wrong on the vast majority of everything they talk about that isn’t hyper specific to a narrow and niche topic.
So phd level intelligence to me just means it’s more prone to the being confidently wrong and judgemental.
sometimes they are outdated if they have been doing projects or research for a while too.
To obtain a PhD, you need to contribute something original to your field of study, not just regurgitate what you’ve scraped from other studies.
ceos are so obsessed with this and thinking it can replace doctors in diagnosing people too.
If it spouts out enough nonsense something will be right eventually
GPT5 is gonna monkey a new hamlet? ITS GONNA BE THE BLURST OF TIMES?
I guess given enough hardware and environmental destruction everything is possible.
I wonder whether any LLMs are any good at hypothesis generation
probably not, it will like scrape from sources that arnt even based on research, or research papers, if its allowed to use the internet it will probably process opinions too.
1000 monkeys with typewriters comes to mind
Based on the fact that they’d give someone like me a PhD, this comes as no surprise. But it’s not saying as much about GPT-5 as a lot of people might think.
“Intelligence” is such a dumb word.
Why is that image giving the same vibes as:
why do they look like gelflings?
Disney contract.
just looks like a fusion of these 2(scarlet witch)
does that mean it’s also going to have PhD-level depression?
Am I supposed to be impressed? I have a PhD level intelligence and I am not exactly impressive.
LMAO right.
This PhD = Genius trope needs to end.
You missed what they meant. It means gpt5 is really good at one arbitrary and extremely specific topic. Anything else it’s comparable with a random person on the street.
Anything else it’s comparable with a random person on the street.
I’d say we’re actually worse than the average person at everything else. Too much of our brain is allocated to our research.
Reality is the opposite though. GPT5 is expert in a pretty wide amount of trivia. It’s better than the average uneducated person in every subject, but worse than an expert in every subject.
And the average person has (usually) no idea if what they’re being fed is even correct. But as long as it sounds correct to someone who has no idea…
Plausible bullshit machines.
That’s my favorite Nine Inch Nails album!
All the AI are wrong at least 1 in 20 tokens, probably more like 3 in 20, to their sample data which is also wrong a considerable amount of the time, so it is an expert in literally nothing and never will be.
That 1 in 20 number comes from the 2020 paper by OpenAI and the 2022 paper correcting it by Deepmind about AI scaling laws where the AI inverse error rate would never reach 94% with infnite training and power.
deleted by creator
GIGO
It can also have good in and garbage out, as I mentioned it will never achieve human input accuracy much less superhuman input.
Right? I know more shit than some people on some topics…and less shit than other people on other topics.
Expertise might be what they were going for…but they can’t say that because AI can’t have expertise on anything.
Expertise is about knowing what you don’t know, just as much about what you know. The terms like “PhD level intelligence” are meant to mislead people. LLMs cannot understand simply because they are just statistical parrots. Only fools blindly trust output of LLMs.
There’s a lot of a disagreement to be had here…but AI is a topic where we all pretty much seem to agree.
I’ve experimented with AI (so-called chatbots) and the best that can be said about it is it’s a tool…not even a good tool…for starting a project when you’re stuck. It’s absolutely unreliable for anything approaching a final project. I guess…it’s really great if you enjoy being pissed off that it can both mine valid obscure information, while at the same time lie to your face over and over…but then do a 180 on something that’s true or a lie just because you tell it to.
The only value I got out of AI was it made me laugh out loud once…genuinely. I realized it had created this entire fake universe when it was supposed to be researching something real…and like a crazy person I was scolding it…when it was apologing it told me “I’m sorry…I understand that I’m a bit like a toaster that was advertised as a chef…but really all I do is try to burn your house down”. I thought it was hilarious and appropriate.
I understand that I’m a bit like a toaster that was advertised as a chef…but really all I do is try to burn your house down
This is a beautiful metaphor and I’m pissed that it came out of an LLM. Either this is a hilarious consequence of the word “toaster” often being followed by “burn your house”, or someone else on the Internet came up with it and the LLM just regurgitated.
I mean…I’m sure it came from something I said to it…all LLMs are good for is being agreeable and reflecting what you want back to you…provided what you ask for is simple.
I still count and do math with my fingers and still fuck it up. I guess they’re just like us. 🥲
I would like to see you count 1.33 + 3.25 on your fingers. 🙂
Hold my beer while I sum up each decimal placement and carry the number over.
Nah, it’ll be more impressive if you do it while holding your beer.
I need full access to my piggies. :(
I do that and I have a BS in mathematics. and in 4th grade I literally used to write “I hate math” at the top of my math homework. as much as primary education systems want it to be, computation speed is not mathematical aptitude. you can memorize multiplication tables up to 20, that’s not gonna help you understand Cantor’s theorem
PhD is not even a “level of intelligence”.
PhD level of sufficiently regular but transient discipline and hyperfocus.
That’s ok. This is intended to people with clueless-decision-maker intelligence level.
I hate the way the media makes this problem so much worse by incorrectly describing LLMs. They can’t “have intelligence”. They are incapable of any kind of thought. The “intelligence” of GPT1 and GPT5 are the same, in that neither have any. They are complex computational algorithms designed to generate text from prompts. That is absolutely not the same thing as thinking or knowing things.
There are entire cults springing out of the ground believing LLMs to literally be thinking feeling beings 💀 we are so beyond fucked.
deleted by creator
You can say the same thing about an ant or a slug. I don’t think the philosophy of what intelligence is is as cut and dry as what you say.
I agree they’re pretty stupid, but I wouldn’t say they’re zero on a scale of zero to human. If an llm type algorithm happens to be some part of the human intelligence algorithm then an llm has some fraction of intelligence
Most people have PHD intelligence. They just don’t have the motivation, need or care to do all that fucking work to get it.
To be honest, as I chat with more and more random strangers these days it does begin to dawn on me that we all do roughly spend ~70 years on this planet devoting our attention to one thing or another, and that though people might not have what is seen as “classical intelligence” (i.e. high IQ’s, political savvy, high empathy / sociopathy, etc.), we are genuinely absolute genius’s in one particular field or another.
For example, I had an old roommate whose politics would make me drink and stare at the horizon whilst he consistently acted against his own self interests to punish people he was told are responsibly for his financial lot in life. But, he was an absolute wizard when it came to predicting the outcome of a sports game. It could be anything - football, hockey, tennis, whatever - he immediately ran their stats straight off the top off his head, summarized their strengths and weaknesses and came out with an outcome that was on the whole close to the truth.
Another example, my ex. We never really had deep philosophical discussions about the state of the world, and her consumerist lifestyle was one I tried to actively ignore. But, she was incredible at turning a house into a home – her interior design skills would genuinely surprise me at how well-thought out and in-depth they were, not only in terms of style and decor, but also in the way that she would execute and coordinate the tasks with me to beautify our home.
TL;DR – I do really think most people have high intelligence in one specific field or another, we just value people unequally using classical measures of success (wealth, education)
If your roommate was so good at predicting the outcome of sporting events, couldn’t he have used that skill to fix his financial situation, rather than blame others?
Tbh, transforming your talents into money is also a skill that some people have in spades and some people lack entirely. I’ve actually always bristled about that skill specifically, because I think Kim kardashian is an absolute phenom in that area and it always rankles when people say she’s stupid. She turned: a moderately famous but deceased and no longer relevant dad; relatively very high wealth (but not comparable to her current estate); an assistanceship to Paris Hilton; and a sex tape into an absolute empire. That’s a lot of points in her favor, but she makes the best possible decisions so consistently, she’s got to be one of the marketing greats.
80% prediction rate isn’t anything to bank on :P
If you know the rate, and it’s that far above 50%, you should be able to make it work.
it’s 80%, 65% of the time :-)
I have a PHD in interior decorating too!
… or the money to go on that journey
Maybe it’s just my field, but every PhD program I’ve seen, applied to, attended, sent students to, etc… was basically paid for, outright. Mostly it’s a matter of moving, which is a gigantic bitch.
It’s paid, but (at least in my case) doesn’t pay that much. It’s barely enough to live off of if you’re really careful with your money. I wouldn’t have been able to do it without accumulating significant savings beforehand.
Paid PhDs are only the norm in stem, and those are the exact subjects where academia is a huge pay cut compared to industry. Hell, I’ll be taking a huge pay cut (in terms of net hourly wage) when I finish my master’s and quit my part time job, that requires a bachelor’s, and start a PhD.
Depends in if you include behavior and psych as STEM, I guess, then.
Yeah, should’ve specified, hard sciences
You already said STEM. Some universities I’ve worked with include psych in the STEM department. It is a science. Fuck saying “hard sciences” like some kind of tiered distinction.
And, to my previous point… every psych PhD I’ve come across has been paid for. Hell, my advisor even had the balls to say “if you’re paying for a PhD, you’re doing it wrong,” when someone asked about funding during the interview.
It’s a colloquial term. My best friend is a psychologist and she taught me that distinction (I’m not a native English speaker), and I genuinely didn’t know some people took offense to it. Never meant for it to be tiered. I know psychology is a science, and a natural one at that. You’re the one acting like your field is somehow special and better than others. I tried to be general and you said your field doesn’t fit in, so ‘you already said stem’ makes zero sense.
Either way, I never said it was normal to pay for a PhD? I said it’s a huge pay cut vs working and industry job, which not everyone can take. Some people have others financially depend on them, and they can’t just decide to accept eating half of what they could otherwise for self fulfilment purposes.
Don’t you need a Graduate degree AND a Post Graduate degree to even be eligible for most PhDs?
It depends on the field, program of study, and institution. Some places want masters degrees coming in. Others, a bachelor’s or postbacc, so they can do a combined “full tour” masters-through-PhD and they get to shape students as-is.
no they fucking don’t
I would not be surprised if a simple majority of Americans were functionally illiterate at this point. 5 years ago it was over 1/7 in my state actually illiterate and let’s just say I don’t live in the deep south or midwest
That’s not a matter of capacity though. Most kids are able to learn to read through basic instruction and almost all of the remaining kids can learn through appropriate intervention. This is why literacy is largely a policy decision rather than a matter of aptitude.
i think if you work in a customer facing job for at least five years and walk away thinking “yes these people are all capable phd candidates” there’s something wrong going on in that analysis so hey i guess we’ll just disagree here
Would i say there’s a significant portion of society that is through various ways made unable to utilize their intelligence i.e. an einstein toiling in the fields because they got bills and shit to deal with? sure but id have to not believe my lying eyes to extend that to “most” people
That’s fair. I wouldn’t go as far as saying everyone could be a phd candidate. For one thing, I think that’s a skill set that goes beyond intellectual aptitude and not everyone has the necessary temperament and set of tertiary skills. There’s also a big difference between what could have been if everyone had been educated properly from birth vs where people are at after decades of neglect and trauma and atrophy. That shit literally causes brain damage.
PhDs themselves aren’t very smart. They’re just sheets of paper. 🤷♂️
Is a thing smart if it holds knowledge?
I know a dude with a PhD in Computer Science who’s far-right and his sister is a psychiatrist who thinks conversion therapy works lol lmao
This just shows that there is no correlation between beliefs and intelligence. The knowledge you obtain gets applied on top of your belief system, often times doesn’t change your beliefs. I have a couple of doctor friends and I wouldn’t go to 1 of them if my life depended on it. She graduated from a Caribbean med school and is your typical maga.
many doctors are just really good at regurgitating information they gathered in their 20’s, they’re not particularly inspired in their field of study or stay up-to-date on all the latest information. they just got into the work because it appeared to be a stable well-paying job, simple as
then are entire fields compromised by $ and short-sightedness, like podetry. modern feet have so many problems because modern shoes are just…terrible, but podiatrists make a bunch of $ peddling “arch support”, special shoes/inserts etc.
the foot-arch comes from a muscle, muscles atrophy when you when support them…all you need to do to get arches back is wear flat-soled shoes (this hurts, if you’ve not worn them…ever, as those muscles have barely been used)
Also it is a reminder that an expert in something is not generally an expert in anything else, and anything they’re not expert in they’re only as good at it as the average person of the same intelligence and education
And let’s not forget the avg person is dumb as rocks. All of us included.
