Large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4 can identify a person’s age, location, gender and income with up to 85 per cent accuracy simply by analysing their posts on social media.

But the AIs also picked up on subtler cues, like location-specific slang, and could estimate a salary range from a user’s profession and location.

Reference:

arXiv DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2310.07298

  • guyrocket@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wonder how long it will take for the media to get past the “AI is GOD DAMN AMAZING” phase and start real journalism about AI.

    Seriously, neural networks have existed since the 1990s. The tech is not all that amazing, really.

    Find someone that can explain what’s going on inside a neural net. Then I’ll be impressed.

    • TheChurn@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Explaining what happens in a neural net is trivial. All they do is approximate (generally) nonlinear functions with a long series of multiplications and some rectification operations.

      That isn’t the hard part, you can track all of the math at each step.

      The hard part is stating a simple explanation for the semantic meaning of each operation.

      When a human solves a problem, we like to think that it occurs in discrete steps with simple goals: “First I will draw a diagram and put in the known information, then I will write the governing equations, then simplify them for the physics of the problem”, and so on.

      Neural nets don’t appear to solve problems that way, each atomic operation does not have that semantic meaning. That is the root of all the reporting about how they are such ‘black boxes’ and researchers ‘don’t understand’ how they work.

      • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah but most people don’t know this and have never looked. It seems way more complex to the layman than it is because instinctually we assume that anything that accomplishes great feats must be incredibly intricate

      • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        When a human solves a problem, we like to think that it occurs in discrete steps with simple goals: “First I will draw a diagram and put in the known information, then I will write the governing equations, then simplify them for the physics of the problem”, and so on.

        I wonder how our brain even comes to formulate these steps in a way we can comprehend, the amount of neurons and zones firing on all cylinders seems tiring to imagine