413
Larian's head writer has a simple answer for how AI-generated text helps development: 'It doesn't,' thanks to its best output being 'a 3/10 at best' worse than his worst drafts (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
83 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -13 points 10 months ago (16 children)

That means in about 6 months or so the AI content quality will be about an 8/10. The processors spread machine "learning" incredibly fast. Some might even say exponentially fast. Pretty soon it'll be like that old song "If you wonder why your letters never get a reply, when you tell me that you love me, I want to see you write it". "Letters" is an old version of one-on-one tweeting, but with no character limit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Only if you assume that its performance will continue improving for a good while and (at least) linearly. The companies are really struggling to give their models more compute or more training data now and frankly it doesn't seem like there have been any big strides for a while

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago

    Yeah… Linear increases in performance appear to require exponentially more data, hardware, and energy.

    Meanwhile, the big companies are passing around the same $100bn IOU, amortizing GPUs on 6-year schedules but burning them out in months, using those same GPUs as collateral on massive loans, and spending based on an ever-accelerating number of data centers which are not guaranteed to get built or receive sufficient power.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago*

    What improvements have there been in the previous 6 months? From what I've seen the AI is still spewing the same 3/10 slop it has since 2021, with maybe one or two improvements bringing it up from 2/10. I've heard several people say some newer/bigger models actually got worse at certain tasks, and clean training data is pretty much dried up to even train more models.

    I just don't see any world where scaling up the compute and power usage is going to suddenly improve the quality orders of magnitude. By design LLMs are programmed to output the most statistically likely response, but almost by definition is going to be the most average, bland response possible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    I love how you idiots think this tech hasn’t already hit its ceiling. It’s been functionally stagnant for some time now.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    Hey. I'm just one idiot. Who else are you talking about?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    You’re not just one, you’re one of many. All saying the same shit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Lots and lots of people have told me that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    I doubt that. A lot of the poor writing quality comes down to choice. All the most powerful models are inherently trained to be bland, seek harmony with the user, and generally come across as kind of slimy in a typically corporate sort of way. This bleeds into the writing style pretty heavily.

    A model trained specifically for creative writing without such a focus would probably do better. We'll see.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    load more comments (1 reply)