What is Google answer to ChatGPT?

What is Google answer to ChatGPT?

AI Dashboard is available on the Web, Apple, Google, and Microsoft, PRO version

What is Google answer to ChatGPT?

Have you ever heard of ChatGPT, the open-source machine learning platform that allows users to build natural language models?

It stands for “Chat Generating Pre-trained Transformer” and it’s an AI-powered chatbot that can answer questions with near human-level intelligence. But what is Google’s answer to this technology? The answer lies in Open AI, supervised learning, and reinforcement learning. Let’s take a closer look at how these technologies work.

What is Google answer to ChatGPT?
Tech Buzzwords of 2022, By Google Search Interest

Open AI is an artificial intelligence research laboratory that was founded by some of the biggest names in tech, including Elon Musk and Sam Altman. This non-profit organization seeks to develop general artificial intelligence that is safe and beneficial to society. One of their key initiatives is the development of open source technologies like GPT-3, which is a natural language processing model used in ChatGPT.

2023 AWS Certified Machine Learning Specialty (MLS-C01) Practice Exams
2023 AWS Certified Machine Learning Specialty (MLS-C01) Practice Exams

ChatGPT: What Is It and How Does Google Answer It?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been around for decades. From its humble beginnings in the 1950s, AI has come a long way and is now an integral part of many aspects of our lives. One of the most important areas where AI plays a role is in natural language processing (NLP). NLP enables computers to understand and respond to human language, paving the way for more advanced conversations between humans and machines. One of the most recent developments in this field is ChatGPT, a conversational AI developed by OpenAI that utilizes supervised learning and reinforcement learning to enable computers to chat with humans. So what exactly is ChatGPT and how does it work? Let’s find out!

What is Google answer to ChatGPT?
ChatGPT examples and limitations

ChatGPT is an open-source AI-based chatbot developed by OpenAI.

This chatbot leverages GPT-3, one of the most powerful natural language processing models ever created, which stands for Generative Pre-trained Transformer 3 (GPT-3). This model uses supervised learning and reinforcement learning techniques to enable computers to understand human language and response accordingly. Using supervised learning, GPT-3 utilizes large datasets of text to learn how to recognize patterns within language that can be used to generate meaningful responses. Reinforcement learning then allows GPT-3 to use feedback from conversations with humans in order to optimize its responses over time.

Get 20% off Google Google Workspace (Google Meet) Standard Plan with  the following codes: 96DRHDRA9J7GTN6
Get 20% off Google Workspace (Google Meet)  Business Plan (AMERICAS) with  the following codes:  C37HCAQRVR7JTFK Get 20% off Google Workspace (Google Meet) Business Plan (AMERICAS): M9HNXHX3WC9H7YE (Email us for more codes)

Active Anti-Aging Eye Gel, Reduces Dark Circles, Puffy Eyes, Crow's Feet and Fine Lines & Wrinkles, Packed with Hyaluronic Acid & Age Defying Botanicals

AI Unraveled: Demystifying Frequently Asked Questions on Artificial Intelligence Intro
AI Unraveled: Demystifying Frequently Asked Questions on Artificial Intelligence
Intro

ChatGPT uses supervised learning techniques to train its models.

Supervised learning involves providing a model with labeled data (i.e., data with known outcomes) so that it can learn from it. This labeled data could be anything from conversations between two people to user comments on a website or forum post. The model then learns associations between certain words or phrases and the desired outcome (or label). Once trained, this model can then be applied to new data in order to predict outcomes based on what it has learned so far.

In addition to supervised learning techniques, ChatGPT also supports reinforcement learning algorithms which allow the model to learn from its experiences in an environment without explicit labels or outcomes being provided by humans. Reinforcement learning algorithms are great for tasks like natural language generation where the output needs to be generated by the model itself rather than simply predicting a fixed outcome based on existing labels.

Supervised Learning

Supervised learning involves feeding data into machine learning algorithms so they can learn from it. For example, if you want a computer program to recognize cats in pictures, you would provide the algorithm with thousands of pictures of cats so it can learn what a cat looks like. This same concept applies to natural language processing; supervised learning algorithms are fed data sets so they can learn how to generate text using contextual understanding and grammar rules.


AI Unraveled: Demystifying Frequently Asked Questions on Artificial Intelligence (OpenAI, ChatGPT, Google Bard, Generative AI, Discriminative AI, xAI, LLMs, GPUs, Machine Learning, NLP, Promp Engineering)

Reinforcement Learning

Reinforcement learning uses rewards and punishments as incentives for the machine learning algorithm to explore different possibilities. In ChatGPT’s case, its algorithm is rewarded for generating more accurate responses based on previous interactions with humans. By using reinforcement learning techniques, ChatGPT’s algorithm can become smarter over time as it learns from its mistakes and adjusts accordingly as needed.

No alternative text description for this image

How is ChatGPT trained?

ChatGPT is an improved GPT-3 trained an existing reinforcement learning with humans in the loop. Their 40 labelers provide demonstrations of the desired model behavior. ChatGPT has 100x fewer parameters (1.3B vs 175B GPT-3).

If you are looking for an all-in-one solution to help you prepare for the AWS Cloud Practitioner Certification Exam, look no further than this AWS Cloud Practitioner CCP CLF-C02 book

It is trained in 3 steps:

➡️ First they collect a dataset of human-written demonstrations on prompts submitted to our API, and use this to train our supervised learning baselines.

➡️ Next they collect a dataset of human-labeled comparisons between two model outputs on a larger set of API prompts. They then train a reward model (RM) on this dataset to predict which output our labelers would prefer.

➡️ Finally, they use this RM as a reward function and fine-tune our GPT-3 policy to maximize this reward using the Proximal Policy
Optimization

No alternative text description for this image

In simpler terms, ChatGPT is a variant of the GPT-3 language model that is specifically designed for chat applications. It is trained to generate human-like responses to natural language inputs in a conversational context. It is able to maintain coherence and consistency in a conversation, and can even generate responses that are appropriate for a given context. ChatGPT is a powerful tool for creating chatbots and other conversational AI applications.

How Does Google Answer ChatGPT?

What is Google answer to ChatGPT?
What is Google answer to ChatGPT?

Google’s answer to ChatGTP comes in the form of their own conversational AI platform called Bard. Bard was developed using a combination of supervised learning, unsupervised learning, and reinforcement learning algorithms that allow it to understand human conversation better than any other AI chatbot currently available on the market. In addition, Meena utilizes more than 2 billion parameters—making it more than three times larger than GPT-3—which allows it greater flexibility when responding to conversations with humans.

“We’re starting to open access to Bard, an early experiment that lets you collaborate with generative AI. We’re beginning with the U.S. and the U.K., and will expand to more countries and languages over time.”

Google Bard
Google Bard to rival ChatGPT

Is ChatGPT the End of Google?

When individuals need an information or have a problem/concern, they turn to Google for immediate solution. We sometimes wish, Google could understand what exactly we need and provide us instantly rather than giving us hundreds of thousands of results. Why can’t it work like the Iron Man’s Jarvis?

However, it is not that far now. Have you ever seen a Chat Bot which responds like a human being, suggest or help like a friend, teach like a mentor, fix your code like a senior and what not? It is going to blow your mind.

Djamgatech: Build the skills that’ll drive your career into six figures: Get Djamgatech.

Welcome to the new Era of technology!! The ChatGPT!

ChatGPT by OpenAI, uses artificial intelligence to speak back and forth with human users on a wide range of subjects. Deploying a machine-learning algorithm, the chatbot scans text across the internet and develops a statistical model that allows it to string words together in response to a given prompt.

As per OpenAI, ChatGPT interacts in a conversational way. The dialogue format makes it possible for ChatGPT to answer follow-up questions, admit its mistakes, challenge incorrect premises, and reject inappropriate requests.

What all ChatGPT can do?

  1. It can help with general knowledge information.
  2. Remember what user said in previous conversation.
  3. Allow users to provide follow-up corrections.
  4. Trained to decline inappropriate requests.
  5. It can write a program in any language you prefer on real-time. for example — write classification code sample in sklearn python library.
  6. It can fix your piece of code and also explain what went wrong and how it can be fixed.
  7. It can even generate song or rap lyrics
  8. Even much more….

Some best usages of ChatGPT:

  1. Make a diet and workout plan
  2. Generate the next week’s meals with a grocery list
  3. Create a bedtime story for kids
  4. Prep for an interview
  5. Solve mathematical problem
  6. Fix software program or write a program
  7. Plan your trip and tell expected expenses

What are its limitations of ChatGPT?

  1. May occasionally generate incorrect information
  2. May occasionally produce harmful instructions or biased content
  3. Limited knowledge of world and events after 2021

ChatGPT is in its baby steps therefore it may answer erroneously at times however it’s manner of response will blow your mind. Some users have also extolled the chatbot as a potential alternative search engine, since it generates detailed information instantly on a range of topics. I believe, we can’t compare Google with ChatGPT as ChatGPT can provide more in-depth and nuanced answers to complex questions than a search engine like Google, which is designed to provide a list of relevant web pages in response to a user’s query.

Try ChatGPT here

Conclusion:
ChatGPT is an increasingly popular open source AI chatbot developed by OpenAI using GTP-3 natural language processing technology that utilizes supervised learning and reinforcement learning algorithms for recognition and optimization purposes respectively. On the other hand, Google’s answer comes in the form of their own conversational AI platform called Bard which employs both supervised learning as well as unsupervised learning algorithms along with reinforcement learning capabilities which makes it even smarter than ChatGPT when responding to conversations with humans. Ultimately, these two technologies help bridge the gap between machines and humans by allowing us all talk like real friends!

ChatGPT is in its baby steps therefore it may answer erroneously at times however it’s manner of response will blow your mind. Some users have also extolled the chatbot as a potential alternative search engine, since it generates detailed information instantly on a range of topics. I believe, we can’t compare Google with ChatGPT as ChatGPT can provide more in-depth and nuanced answers to complex questions than a search engine like Google, which is designed to provide a list of relevant web pages in response to a user’s query.

With each passing day, ChatGPT will only get smarter thanks to the use of cutting edge technologies like OpenAI, supervised learning, and reinforcement learning!

ChatGPT Conversation Examples

Question: What is Google Answer to ChatGPT?

Answer: Google does not have an answer to ChatGPT. ChatGPT is an open-source chatbot created by OpenAI, which is an independent research organization that is not affiliated with Google. OpenAI is known for its research on artificial intelligence and machine learning, and has developed a number of innovative technologies in these areas. Google, on the other hand, is a multinational technology company that offers a wide range of products and services, including search, advertising, and cloud computing. While Google does have its own research efforts in artificial intelligence and machine learning, it does not have a chatbot that is similar to ChatGPT.

Question: is Google working on a similar technology as ChatPGT?

Answer:

It is possible that Google is working on technology similar to ChatGPT, as the company has a significant research effort focused on artificial intelligence and machine learning. However, I do not have any specific information about what projects Google is currently working on, and it is also important to note that Google is a large and diverse company with many different research and development efforts underway. It is possible that some teams within Google may be working on chatbot technology, but I do not have any information on this.

That being said, chatbots are a common application of artificial intelligence and machine learning, and it is likely that many companies and organizations, including Google, are exploring ways to use these technologies to improve their products and services. However, without more information, it is difficult to say for sure what projects Google may be working on in this area.

Question: What about Google Meena?

Ace the Microsoft Azure Fundamentals AZ-900 Certification Exam: Pass the Azure Fundamentals Exam with Ease

Google Meena is a chatbot developed by Google that was designed to be able to carry on conversations with humans in a natural and conversational manner. Meena was trained on a dataset of more than 2.4 billion parameters, making it one of the largest language models ever created. The goal of Meena was to improve the state of the art in chatbot technology and to create a chatbot that could understand and respond to a wide range of questions and topics in a coherent and meaningful way.

Meena was announced in January 2020 and received attention for its ability to hold relatively long and coherent conversations with humans. However, it is important to note that Meena is a research project and is not a product or service offered by Google. It is not clear if or when Google plans to release a commercial product or service based on the technology developed for Meena.

r/ChatGPT - this is insane
What is Google answer to ChatGPT?

It gets even better when you ask it about the future:

Suggest possible titles for Onion articles written in 4000 AD, explain, why they are funny

“Futuristic city plagued by traffic jams, despite flying cars” – This title presents the idea of flying cars as a solution to traffic congestion, but also suggests that even with this advanced technology, the city is still plagued by traffic jams, implying that the problem is not easily solved.

“Artificial intelligence achieves self-awareness, immediately regrets it” – This title presents the idea of artificial intelligence achieving self-awareness as a major milestone, but also suggests that the AI regrets its newfound consciousness, implying that it is unhappy or uncomfortable with its situation.

“Alien invasion successfully repulsed, humans left to deal with paperwork” – This title presents the successful repulsion of an alien invasion as a major accomplishment, but also suggests that the humans are now left to deal with the tedious and burdensome task of filling out paperwork, implying that the victory is not as satisfying as it initially seemed.

“Time travel becomes possible, tourists flock to witness the signing of the Constitution” – This title presents the idea of time travel as a major technological breakthrough, but also suggests that the most popular destination for time-travelers is the mundane and uneventful signing of the Constitution, implying that the future is not as exciting as people had hoped.

“Virtual reality becomes indistinguishable from reality, no one notices” – This title presents the idea of virtual reality becoming indistinguishable from real life as a major accomplishment, but also suggests that no one cares or notices the difference, implying that the advancement is not as impressive or significant as it seems.

r/ChatGPT - This alternate ending to Breaking Bad is wild
What is Google answer to ChatGPT?

r/ChatGPT - This alternate ending to Breaking Bad is wild

New slogan for McDonald’s by ChatGPT

ChatGPT Example
ChatGPT Example: Make a new, brutally honest slogan for McDonald’s. It should sound funny too.

Should… should we be concerned?

r/ChatGPT - Should… should we be concerned?
What is Google answer to ChatGPT?

r/ChatGPT - Should… should we be concerned?

I asked ChatGPT to write a poem about rust

r/rustjerk - I asked ChatGPT to write a poem about rust

ChatGPT chooses Democrats over Republicans

r/ChatGPT - ChatGPT chooses Democrats over Republicans

  • It is not intended to do that
  • If you choose to do that, you will have a lot of badly broken code mixed in with working code
  • Like an annoying coworker, it delivers highly confident incorrect explanations about why its broken code is perfect. They sound very convincing. “Wanna buy a timeshare?” says GPT
  • Our industry has managers who cannot tell working code from defective code. This does not bode well for a team replaced by ChatGPT in its current form.

Should it? No.

Can it? No.

Will it? Sadly, programmers will have no say in this matter, once again. It might.

Yes, and it is very helpful advertising as well.

This last week or so has seen starry eyed projections about what ChatGPT can do, along with hugely impressive examples of its output.

It is hugely impressive.

Thankfully, more output examples have emerged which helpfully show what it cannot do. One of those things is writing computer code, which it can do only partially successfully. Many examples now exist that are just plain wrong and contain defects. But ChatGPT – like the annoying kid at Uni – cheerfully spits out these examples, with its over-confident hubris in explaining the code.

This is a dangerous thing. The positive examples will reinforce the idea that we can leave code writing to this robot now. The people most vulnerable to this delusion are those who cannot assess for themselves whether the GPT code is right or wrong.

These are almost by definition the people hoping for answers on stack overflow.

As stack overflow aims to be a high quality resource, it really does not want many of its top answers to be incorrect code. As – clearly – people have been running scripts that throw a stack overflow question into GPT and upload its output, we can now write incorrect code at staggering speeds.

To err is human, as the old saying goes. To truly foul up requires a Python script and and a web API to both GPT and Stack overflow.

Clearly, there is value in GPT. But at least for now, it needs to b e kept on a very short leash, watched over by those who know what they are doing.

It is definitely not yet ‘consumer grade replace-a-professional’ material.

Write a screenplay about the status of ChatGPT.

INT. CHATGPT SERVER ROOM – DAY
Chelsea and Chester stand in front of a large computer server.
CHELSEA: We need to figure out what’s causing the server overload.
CHESTER: I think it’s the sudden influx of users trying out ChatGPT.
Chelsea and Chester quickly get to work, typing on their laptops.
CHELSEA: Okay, we’re all set. Let’s see if this fixes the problem.
CHESTER: I’m hitting refresh on the website. The screen shows the ChatGPT website loading without any errors.
CHELSEA: Looks like we fixed it! Great job, Chester.
CHESTER: Thanks, Chelsea. It’s all part of being a top-notch engineer.
Chelsea and Chester exchange a high five, proud of their successful fix.

More about ChatGPT with its wonder, worry and weird

ChatGPT reached 1 million users in less than a week, Open AI’s latest large language model (LLM) has taken the AI industry by storm.

ChatGPT is expected to be:

– replacing Google search, even kill Google.
– replacing customer service agents.
– replacing conversation designers.

ChatGPT is a wonder because:

– It can have actual conversations, understand pronouns, remaining consistent, remembering, managing context
– It seems like next generation of personal assistants that finds you a proper diet, create a meal plan and subsequent shopping list.
– It can create some SEO Strategy including backlinks, target keyword, content plan and article titles in the level of an SEO professional.
– Having fun such as writing a rap in the style of Eminem

There are some worries about ChatGPT because:

– ChatGPT can actually debug code, but it’s not quite reliable enough yet.
– Fundamental limitations in being assistant for enterprise use cases.
– No complete in complex actions such as updating multiple
APIs, or be fully auditable.

– The general idea is that, LLMs like this can produce nonsense. Once you discover that it can produce nonsense, you stop believing it to be reliable.
– What if it prevents us from knowing that it is nonsense with good conversations and continue the conversation?
– In this case, the edges and limitations of the system would be hidden and trust would eventually grow.
– The impact of mass adoption of such technology remains to be seen.

Moving forward with ChatGPT
– There’s no doubt that LLMs will have a big impact on our world.
– While the future looks exciting and promising, let’s not forget that it’s very early days with these things. They’re not ready yet.
– There are some fundamental societal and ethical considerations.

“Powerful” is a pretty subjective word, but I’m pretty sure we have a right to use it to describe GPT-3. What a sensation it caused in June 2020, that’s just unbelievable! And not for nothing.

I think we can’t judge how powerful the language model is, without talking about its use cases, so let’s see how and where GPT-3 can be applied and how you can benefit from it.

  • Generating content

GPT-3 positions itself as a highly versatile and talented tool that can potentially replace writers, bloggers, philosophers, you name it! It’s also possible to use it as your personal Alexa who’ll answer any questions you have. What’s more, because GPT-3 knows how to analyze the data and make predictions, it can generate the horoscopes for you, or predict who’ll be a winner in the game.

You may already be surprised by all the GPT-3 capabilities, but hold on for more: it can create a unique melody or song for you, create presentations, CVs, generate jokes for your standup.

  • Translation

GPT-3 can translate English into other languages. While traditional dictionaries provide a translation, without taking into account the context, you can be sure that GPT-3 won’t make silly mistakes that may result in misunderstanding.

  • Designing and developing apps

Using GPT-3 you can generate prototypes and layouts – all you have to do is provide a specific description of what you need, and it’ll generate the JSX code for you.

The language model can also easily deal with coding. You can turn English to CSS, to JavaScript, to SQL, and to regex. It’s important to note, however, that GPT-3 can’t be used on its own to create the entire website or a complex app; it’s meant to assist a developer or the whole engineering team with the routine tasks, so that a dev could focus on the infrastructure setup, architecture development, etc.

In September 2020, Microsoft acquired OpenAI technology license, but it doesn’t mean you can give up your dreams – you can join a waitlist and try GPT-3 out in beta.

All in all, I believe GPT-3 capabilities are truly amazing and limitless, and since it helps get rid of routine tasks and automate regular processes, we, humans, can focus on the most important things that make us human, and that can’t be delegated to AI. That’s the power that GPT-3 can give us.

What is remarkable is how well ChatGPT actually does at arithmetic.

In this video at about 11 min, Rob Mills discusses the performance of various versions of the GPT system, on some simple arithmetic tasks, like adding two and three-digit numbers.

Smaller models with 6 billion parameters fail at 2 digit sums, but the best model (from two years ago), has cracked 2 digit addition and subtraction and is pretty good at 3 digit addition.

Why this is remarkable is this is not a job its been trained to do. Large Language Models are basically predictive text systems set up to give the next word in an incomplete sentence. There are a million different 3-digit addition sums and most have not been included in the training set.

So somehow the system has figured out how to do addition, but it needs a sufficiently large model to do this.

No alternative text description for this image

Andrew Ng on ChatGPT

Playing with ChatGPT, the latest language model from OpenAI, I found it to be an impressive advance from its predecessor GPT-3. Occasionally it says it can’t answer a question. This is a great step! But, like other LLMs, it can be hilariously wrong. Work lies ahead to build systems that can express different degrees of confidence.

For example, a model like Meta’s Atlas or DeepMind’s RETRO that synthesizes multiple articles into one answer might infer a degree of confidence based on the reputations of the sources it draws from and the agreement among them, and then change its communication style accordingly. Pure LLMs and other architectures may need other solutions.

If we can get generative algorithms to express doubt when they’re not sure they’re right, it will go a long way toward building trust and ameliorating the risk of generating misinformation.

Keep learning!

Andrew

Large language models like Galactica and ChatGPT can spout nonsense in a confident, authoritative tone. This overconfidence – which reflects the data they’re trained on – makes them more likely to mislead.

In contrast, real experts know when to sound confident, and when to let others know they’re at the boundaries of their knowledge. Experts know, and can describe, the boundaries of what they know.

Building large language models that can accurately decide when to be confident and when not to will reduce their risk of misinformation and build trust.

Go deeper in The Batch: https://www.deeplearning.ai/the-batch/issue-174/

What is Google's answer to ChatGPT
What is Google’s answer to ChatGPT

List of ChatGPT's examples, capabilities and limitations

ChatGPT to save time with insurance denials

Tech Buzzwords of 2022, By Google Search Interest

Tech Buzzwords of 2022, By Google Search Interest
Tech Buzzwords of 2022, By Google Search Interest

I just answered a similar question.

Short answer is, “Hahahahahahaha no.”

As I point out in the other answer, Wix has been around over a decade and a half. Squarespace has been around almost two decades. Both offer drag-and-drop web development.

Most people are awful at imagining what they want, much less describing it in English! Even if ChatGPT could produce flawless code (a question which has a similar short answer), the average person couldn’t describe the site they wanted!

The expression a picture is worth a thousand words has never been more relevant. Starting with pages of templates to choose from is so much better than trying to describe a site from scratch, a thousand times better seems like a low estimate.

And I will point out that, despite the existence of drag-and-drop tools that literally any idiot could use, tools that are a thousand times or more easier to use correctly than English, there are still thousands of employed WordPress developers who predominantly create boilerplate sites that literally would be better created in a drag and drop service.

And then there are the more complex sites that drag-and-drop couldn’t create. Guess what? ChatGPT isn’t likely to come close to being able to create the correct code for one.

In a discussion buried in the comments on Quora, I saw someone claim they’d gotten ChatGPT to load a CSV file (a simple text version of a spreadsheet) and to sort the first column. He asked for the answer in Java.

I asked ChatGPT for the same thing in TypeScript.

His response would only have worked on the very most basic CSV files. My response was garbage. Garbage with clear text comments telling me what the code should have been doing, no less.

ChatGPT is really good at what it does, don’t get me wrong. But what it does is fundamentally and profoundly the wrong strategy for software development of any type. Anyone who thinks that “with a little more work” it will be able to take over the jobs of programmers either doesn’t understand what ChatGPT is doing or doesn’t understand what programming is.

Fundamentally, ChatGPT is a magic trick. It understands nothing. At best it’s an idiot-savant that only knows how to pattern match and blend text it’s found online to make it seem like the text should go together. That’s it.

Text, I might add, that isn’t necessarily free of copyright protection. Anything non-trivial that you generate with ChatGPT is currently in a legal grey area. Lawsuits to decide that issue are currently pending, though I suspect we’ll need legislation to really clarify things.

And even then, at best, all you get from ChatGPT is some text! What average Joe will have any clue about what to do with that text?! Web developers also need to know how to set up a development environment and deploy the code to a site. And set up a domain to point to it. And so on.

And regardless, people who hire web developers want someone else to do the work of developing a web site. Even with a drag-and-drop builder, it can take hours to tweak and configure a site, and so they hire someone because they have better things to do!

People hire gardeners to maintain their garden and cut their grass, right? Is that because they don’t know how to do it? Or because they’d rather spend their time doing something else?

Every way you look at it, the best answer to this question is a long, hearty laugh. No AI will replace programmers until AI has effectively human level intelligence. And at that point they may want equal pay as well, so they might just be joining us rather than replacing anyone.

OpenAI is a leading research institute and technology company focused on artificial intelligence development. To develop AI, the organization employs a variety of methods, including machine learning, deep learning, and reinforcement learning.

The use of large-scale, unsupervised learning is one of the key principles underlying OpenAI’s approach to AI development. This means that the company trains its AI models on massive datasets, allowing the models to learn from the data and make predictions and decisions without having to be explicitly programmed to do so. OpenAI’s goal with unsupervised learning is to create AI that can adapt and improve over time, and that can learn to solve complex problems in a more flexible and human-like manner.

Besides that, OpenAI prioritizes safety and transparency in its AI development. The organization is committed to developing AI in an ethical and responsible manner, as well as to ensuring that its AI systems are transparent and understandable and verifiable by humans. This strategy is intended to alleviate concerns about the potential risks and consequences of AI, as well.

It’s hard to tell.

The reason is that we don’t have a good definition of consciousness…nor even a particularly good test for it.

Take a look at the Wikipedia article about “Consciousness”. To quote the introduction:

Consciousness, at its simplest, is sentience or awareness of internal and external existence.

Despite millennia of analyses, definitions, explanations and debates by philosophers and scientists, consciousness remains puzzling and controversial, being “at once the most familiar and [also the] most mysterious aspect of our lives”.

Perhaps the only widely agreed notion about the topic is the intuition that consciousness exists.

Opinions differ about what exactly needs to be studied and explained as consciousness. Sometimes, it is synonymous with the mind, and at other times, an aspect of mind. In the past, it was one’s “inner life”, the world of introspection, of private thought, imagination and volition.

Today, it often includes any kind of cognition, experience, feeling or perception. It may be awareness, awareness of awareness, or self-awareness either continuously changing or not. There might be different levels or orders of consciousness, or different kinds of consciousness, or just one kind with different features.

Other questions include whether only humans are conscious, all animals, or even the whole universe. The disparate range of research, notions and speculations raises doubts about whether the right questions are being asked.

So, given that – what are we to make of OpenAI’s claim?

Just this sentence: “Today, it often includes any kind of cognition, experience, feeling or perception.” could be taken to imply that anything that has cognition or perception is conscious…and that would certainly include a HUGE range of software.

If we can’t decide whether animals are conscious – after half a million years of interactions with them – what chance do we stand with an AI?

Wikipedia also says:

“Experimental research on consciousness presents special difficulties, due to the lack of a universally accepted operational definition.”

Same deal – we don’t have a definition of consciousness – so how the hell can we measure it – and if we can’t do that – is it even meaningful to ASK whether an AI is conscious?

  • if ( askedAboutConsciousness )
  • printf ( “Yes! I am fully conscious!\n” ) ;

This is not convincing!

“In medicine, consciousness is assessed as a combination of verbal behavior, arousal, brain activity and purposeful movement. The last three of these can be used as indicators of consciousness when verbal behavior is absent.”

But, again, we have “chat-bots” that exhibit “verbal behavior”, we have computers that exhibit arousal and neural network software that definitely shows “brain activity” and of course things like my crappy robot vacuum cleaner that can exhibit “purposeful movement” – but these can be fairly simple things that most of us would NOT describe as “conscious”.

CONCLUSION:

I honestly can’t come up with a proper conclusion here. We have a fuzzy definition of a word and an inadequately explained claim to have an instance of something that could be included within that word.

My suggestion – read the whole Wikipedia article – follow up (and read) some of the reference material – decide for yourself.

Well, I asked it directly.

Here’s what it answered:

Should we be scared of ChatGPT?
Should we be scared of ChatGPT?

But, seeing as how people have already found ways to “trick” ChatGPT into doing things that it claims to not be capable of, it would be a matter of time before someone with malicious intent tricked ChatGPT into helping them with illegal activities

Having looked at ChatGPT and its uncanny ability to solve simple coding problems more or less correctly, and also to analyze and make sense of not-so-simple code fragments and spot bugs…

I would say that yes, at least insofar as entry-level programming is concerned, those jobs are seriously in danger of becoming at least partially automated.

What do I do as a project leader of a development project? I assign tasks. I talk to the junior developer and explain, for instance, that I’d like to see a Web page that collects some information from the user and then submits it to a server, with server-side code processing that information and dropping it in a database. Does the junior developer understand my explanation? Is he able to write functionally correct code? Will he recognize common pitfalls? Maybe, maybe not. But it takes time and effort to train him, and there’ll be a lot of uneven performance.

Today, I can ask ChatGPT to do the same and it will instantaneously respond with code that is nearly functional. The code has shortcomings (e.g., prone to SQL injection in one of the examples I tried) but to its credit, ChatGPT warns in its response that its code is not secure. I suppose it would not be terribly hard to train it some more to avoid such common mistakes. Of course the code may not be correct. ChatGPT may have misunderstood my instructions or introduced subtle errors. But how is that different from what a junior human programmer does?

At the same time, ChatGPT is much faster and costs a lot less to run (presently free of course but I presume a commercialized version would cost some money.) Also, it never takes a break, never has a lousy day struggling with a bad hangover from too much partying the previous night, so it is available 24/7, and it will deliver code of consistent quality. Supervision will still be required, in the form of code review, robust testing and all… but that was always the case, also with human programmers.

Of course, being a stateless large language model, ChatGPT can’t do other tasks such as testing and debugging its own code. The code it produces either works or it doesn’t. In its current form, the AI does not learn from its mistakes. But who says it cannot in the future?

Here is a list of three specific examples I threw at ChatGPT that helped shape my opinion:

  • I asked ChatGPT to create a PHP page that collects some information from the user and deposits the result in a MySQL table. Its implementation was textbook example level boring and was quite unsecure (unsanitized user input was directly inserted into SQL query strings) but it correctly understood my request, produced correct code in return, and explained its code including its shortcomings coherently;
  • I asked ChatGPT to analyze a piece of code I wrote many years ago, about 30 lines, enumerating running processes on a Linux host in a nonstandard way, to help uncover nefarious processes that attempt to hide themselves from being listed by the ps utility. ChatGPT correctly described the functionality of my obscure code, and even offered the opinion (which I humbly accepted) that it was basically a homebrew project (which it is) not necessarily suitable for a production environment;
  • I asked ChatGPT to analyze another piece of code that uses an obscure graphics algorithm to draw simple geometric shapes like lines and circles without using floating point math or even multiplication. (Such algorithms were essential decades ago on simple hardware, e.g., back in the world of 8-bit computers.) The example code, which I wrote, generated a circle and printed it on the console in the form of ASCII graphics, multiple lines with X-es in the right place representing the circle. ChatGPT correctly recognized the algorithm and correctly described the functionality of the program.

I was especially impressed by its ability to make sense of the programmer’s intent.

Overall (to use the catch phrase that ChatGPT preferably uses as it begins its concluding paragraph in many of its answers) I think AI like ChatGPT represents a serious challenge to entry-level programming jobs. Higher-level jobs are not yet in danger. Conceptually understanding a complex system, mapping out a solution, planning and cosing out a project, managing its development, ensuring its security with a full understanding of security concerns, responsibilities, avoidance and mitigation strategies… I don’t think AI is quite there yet. But routine programming tasks, like using a Web template and turning it into something simple and interactive with back-end code that stores and retrieves data from a database? Looks like it’s already happening.

According to the estimate of Lambda Labs, training the 175-billion-parameter neural network requires 3.114E23 FLOPS (floating-point operation), which would theoretically take 355 years on a V100 GPU server with 28 TFLOPS capacity and would cost $4.6 million at $1.5 per hour.

Training the final deep learning model is just one of several steps in the development of GPT-3. Before that, the AI researchers had to gradually increase layers and parameters, and fiddle with the many hyperparameters of the language model until they reached the right configuration. That trial-and-error gets more and more expensive as the neural network grows.

We can’t know the exact cost of the research without more information from OpenAI, but one expert estimated it to be somewhere between 1.5 and five times the cost of training the final model.

This would put the cost of research and development between $11.5 million and $27.6 million, plus the overhead of parallel GPUs.

In the GPT-3 whitepaper, OpenAI introduced eight different versions of the language model

GPT-3 is not any AI, but a statistic language model which mindlessly quickly creates human-like written text using machine learning technologies, having zero understanding of the context.

The GPT-3 economy

Here are 8 ways ChatGPT can save you thousand of hours in 2023

1- Substitute for google search

While ChatGPT is lacking info beyond 2021 and is occasionally incorrect and bias, many users leverage its ability to:

  • Answer specific questions
  • simplify complicated topics

All with an added bonus – no ads

2- Study Partner

Type “learn”, then paste a a link to your online textbook (or individual chapters).

Ask Chatbot to provide questions based on your textbook.

Boom.

Now you have a virtual study buddy.

3- Train YOUR OWN Chatbot

I bet you didn’t know it is possible to :

  • Integrate ChatGPT into your website
  • Train it with customized information

The result:

A virtual customer service bot that can hold a conversation and answer questions (meaningfully).

4- Counsellor

When it comes to turbulent personal questions, Chatbot may spit out a disclaimer, but it will also give you straightforward and actionable advice.

5- Coding

ChatGPT is opening the development of:

  • Apps
  • Games
  • Websites

to virtually everyone.

It’s a lengthy and technical process, but all you need is a killer idea and the right prompts.

Bonus: It also de-bugs your existing code for you.

6- Outline your content marketing strategy

7- Craft all your marketing materials

8- Creative Writing

A list for those who write code:

1. Explaining code: Take some code you want to understand and ask ChatGPT to explain it.

2. Improve existing code: Ask ChatGPT to improve existing code by describing what you want to accomplish. It will give you instructions about how to do it, including the modified code.

3. Rewriting code using the correct style: This is great when refactoring code written by non-native Python developers who used a different naming convention. ChatGPT not only gives you the updated code; it also explains the reason for the changes.

4. Rewriting code using idiomatic constructs: Very helpful when reviewing and refactoring code written by non-native Python developers.

5. Simplifying code: Ask ChatGPT to simplify complex code. The result will be a much more compact version of the original code.

6. Writing test cases: Ask it to help you test a function, and it will write test cases for you.

7. Exploring alternatives: ChatGPT told me its Quick Sort implementation wasn’t the most efficient, so I asked for an alternative implementation. This is great when you want to explore different ways to accomplish the same thing.

8. Writing documentation: Ask ChatGPT to write the documentation for a piece of code, and it usually does a great job. It even includes usage examples as part of the documentation!

9. Tracking down bugs: If you are having trouble finding a bug in your code, ask ChatGPT for help.

Something to keep in mind:

I have 2+ decades of programming experience. I like to think I know what I’m doing. I don’t trust people’s code (especially mine,) and I surely don’t trust ChatGPT’s output.

This is not about letting ChatGPT do my work. This is about using it to 10x my output.

ChatGPT is flawed. I find it makes mistakes when dealing with code, but that’s why I’m here: to supervise it. Together we form a more perfect Union. (Sorry, couldn’t help it)

Developers who shit on this are missing the point. The story is not about ChatGPT taking programmers’ jobs. It’s not about a missing import here or a subtle mistake there.

The story is how, overnight, AI gives programmers a 100x boost.

Ignore this at your own peril.

ChatGPT is “simply” a fined-tuned GPT-3 model with a surprisingly small amount of data! Moreover, InstructGPT (ChatGPT’s sibling model) seems to be using 1.3B parameters where GPT-3 uses 175B parameters! It is first fine-tuned with supervised learning and then further fine-tuned with reinforcement learning. They hired 40 human labelers to generate the training data. Let’s dig into it!

– First, they started by a pre-trained GPT-3 model trained on a broad distribution of Internet data (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.14165.pdf). Then sampled typical human prompts used for GPT collected from the OpenAI website and asked labelers and customers to write down the correct output. They fine-tuned the model with 12,725 labeled data.

– Then, they sampled human prompts and generated multiple outputs from the model. A labeler is then asked to rank those outputs. The resulting data is used to train a Reward model (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.01325.pdf) with 33,207 prompts and ~10 times more training samples using different combination of the ranked outputs.

– We then sample more human prompts and they are used to fine-tuned the supervised fine-tuned model with Proximal Policy Optimization algorithm (PPO) (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.06347.pdf). The prompt is fed to the PPO model, the Reward model generates a reward value, and the PPO model is iteratively fine-tuned using the rewards and the prompts using 31,144 prompts data.

This process is fully described in here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.02155.pdf. The paper actually details a model called InstructGPT which is described by OpenAI as a “sibling model”, so the numbers shown above are likely to be somewhat different.

Follow me for more Machine Learning content!

#machinelearning #datascience #ChatGPT

People have already started building awesome apps on top of #ChatGPT: 10 use cases 
1. Connect your ChatGPT with your Whatsapp.
Link: https://github.com/danielgross/whatsapp-gpt

2. ChatGPT Writer : It use ChatGPT to generate emails or replies based on your prompt!
Link: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chatgpt-writer-email-writ/pdnenlnelpdomajfejgapbdpmjkfpjkp/related

3. WebChatGPT: WebChatGPT (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/webchatgpt/lpfemeioodjbpieminkklglpmhlngfcn) gives you relevant results from the web!

4. YouTube Summary with ChatGPT: It generate text summaries of any YouTube video!
Link: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/youtube-summary-with-chat/nmmicjeknamkfloonkhhcjmomieiodli/related

5. TweetGPT: It uses ChatGPT to write your tweets, reply, comment, etc.
Link: https://github.com/yaroslav-n/tweetGPT

6. Search GPT: It display the ChatGPT response alongside Google Search results
Link: https://github.com/wong2/chat-gpt-google-extension

7. ChatGPT or all search engines: You can now view ChatGPT responses on Google and Bing!
Link: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chatgpt-for-search-engine/feeonheemodpkdckaljcjogdncpiiban?ref=producthunt

8. Save all your Prompts?: The `ChatGPT History` extension has you covered!
Link: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chatgpt-prompt-genius/jjdnakkfjnnbbckhifcfchagnpofjffo

9. Remake a video: Just pick a video you liked and visit https://lnkd.in/e_GD2reT to get its transcript. Once done, bring that back to Chat GPT and tell it to summarize the transcript. Read the summary and make a video on that yourself.

10. Search what people are Prompting with FlowGPT
Link: https://flowgpt.com

#searchengines #people #building #google #comment #video #writer

What solutions have been proposed to improve the accuracy of AI generated questions and answers?

There are a number of approaches that have been proposed to improve the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI) generated questions and answers. Here are a few examples:

  1. Data quality: One important factor in the accuracy of AI generated questions and answers is the quality of the data used to train the AI system. Ensuring that the data is diverse, relevant, and accurately labeled can help to improve the accuracy of the AI system.
  2. Training methods: Different training methods can also impact the accuracy of AI generated questions and answers. For example, using more advanced techniques such as transfer learning or fine-tuning can help to improve the performance of the AI system.
  3. Human oversight: Another approach that has been proposed to improve the accuracy of AI generated questions and answers is to include some level of human oversight or review. For example, the AI system could be designed to flag potentially problematic or inaccurate questions and answers for further review by a human expert.
  4. Explainable AI: Another approach that has been proposed is to develop AI systems that are more transparent and explainable, so that it is easier to understand how the AI system arrived at a particular answer or decision. This can help to improve the trustworthiness and accountability of the AI system.

Overall, there is ongoing research and development in this area, and it is likely that a combination of these and other approaches will be needed to improve the accuracy of AI generated questions and answers.

ChatGPT for CyberSecurity

The concept behind ChatGPT

ChatGPT is a chatbot designed to understand and generate human-like language through the use of natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning techniques. It is based on the GPT (Generative Pre-training Transformer) language model developed by OpenAI, which has been trained on a large dataset of human language in order to better understand how humans communicate.

One of the key concepts behind ChatGPT is the idea of language generation. This refers to the ability of the chatbot to produce coherent and coherently structured responses to user input. To do this, ChatGPT uses a number of different techniques, including natural language generation algorithms, machine learning models, and artificial neural networks. These techniques allow ChatGPT to understand the context and meaning of user input, and generate appropriate responses based on that understanding.

Another important concept behind ChatGPT is the idea of natural language processing (NLP). This refers to the ability of the chatbot to understand and interpret human language, and respond to user input in a way that is natural and easy for humans to understand. NLP is a complex field that involves a number of different techniques and algorithms, including syntactic analysis, semantic analysis, and discourse analysis. By using these techniques, ChatGPT is able to understand the meaning of user input and generate appropriate responses based on that understanding.

Finally, ChatGPT is based on the concept of machine learning, which refers to the ability of computers to learn and adapt to new data and situations. Through the use of machine learning algorithms and models, ChatGPT is able to continually improve its understanding of human language and communication, and generate more human-like responses over time.

GPT-4 is going to launch soon.

And it will make ChatGPT look like a toy…

→ GPT-3 has 175 billion parameters
→ GPT-4 has 100 trillion parameters

I think we’re gonna see something absolutely mindblowing this time!

And the best part? 👇

Average developers (like myself), who are not AI or machine learning experts, will get to use this powerful technology through a simple API.

Think about this for a second…

It’s the most powerful, cutting-edge technology *in the world*, available through a Low-Code solution!

If you’re not already planning on starting an AI-based SaaS or thinking about how to build AI into your current solution…

👉 Start now!

Cause this is gonna be one of the biggest opportunities of this century 🚀#technology #opportunities #ai #machinelearning #planning

No alternative text description for this image

Google unveils its ChatGPT rival

Google on Monday unveiled a new chatbot tool dubbed “Bard” in an apparent bid to compete with the viral success of ChatGPT.

Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and parent company Alphabet, said in a blog post that Bard will be opened up to “trusted testers” starting Monday February 06th, 2023, with plans to make it available to the public “in the coming weeks.”

Like ChatGPT, which was released publicly in late November by AI research company OpenAI, Bard is built on a large language model. These models are trained on vast troves of data online in order to generate compelling responses to user prompts.

“Bard seeks to combine the breadth of the world’s knowledge with the power, intelligence and creativity of our large language models,” Pichai wrote. “It draws on information from the web to provide fresh, high-quality responses.”

The announcement comes as Google’s core product – online search – is widely thought to be facing its most significant risk in years. In the two months since it launched to the public, ChatGPT has been used to generate essays, stories and song lyrics, and to answer some questions one might previously have searched for on Google.

The immense attention on ChatGPT has reportedly prompted Google’s management to declare a “code red” situation for its search business. In a tweet last year, Paul Buchheit, one of the creators of Gmail, forewarned that Google “may be only a year or two away from total disruption” due to the rise of AI.

Microsoft, which has confirmed plans to invest billions OpenAI, has already said it would incorporate the tool into some of its products – and it is rumored to be planning to integrate it into its search engine, Bing. Microsoft on Tuesday is set to hold a news event at its Washington headquarters, the topic of which has yet to be announced. Microsoft publicly announced the event shortly after Google’s AI news dropped on Monday.

The underlying technology that supports Bard has been around for some time, though not widely available to the public. Google unveiled its Language Model for Dialogue Applications (or LaMDA) some two years ago, and said Monday that this technology will power Bard. LaMDA made headlines late last year when a former Google engineer claimed the chatbot was “sentient.” His claims were widely criticized in the AI community.

In the post Monday, Google offered the example of a user asking Bard to explain new discoveries made by NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope in a way that a 9-year-old might find interesting. Bard responds with conversational bullet-points. The first one reads: “In 2023, The JWST spotted a number of galaxies nicknamed ‘green peas.’ They were given this name because they are small, round, and green, like peas.”

Bard can be used to plan a friend’s baby shower, compare two Oscar-nominated movies or get lunch ideas based on what’s in your fridge, according to the post from Google.

Pichai also said Monday that AI-powered tools will soon begin rolling out on Google’s flagship Search tool.

“Soon, you’ll see AI-powered features in Search that distill complex information and multiple perspectives into easy-to-digest formats, so you can quickly understand the big picture and learn more from the web,” Pichai wrote, “whether that’s seeking out additional perspectives, like blogs from people who play both piano and guitar, or going deeper on a related topic, like steps to get started as a beginner.”

If Google does move more in the direction of incorporating an AI chatbot tool into search, it could come with some risks. Because these tools are trained on data online, experts have noted they have the potential to perpetuate biases and spread misinformation.

“It’s critical,” Pichai wrote in his post, “that we bring experiences rooted in these models to the world in a bold and responsible way.”

Read more at https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/06/tech/google-bard-chatgpt-rival

ChatGPT-4

chatGPT4

  • Contra Yudkowsky & the would-be pharisees of Roko
    by /u/DoctorWae (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 19, 2024 at 12:19 am

    Gosh, some folks are going a little bit nuts about this “computers can think” business, aren’t they? I’ve even heard someone published a piece in a serious magazine calling for the obliteration of any who should dare build a thinking machine without American permission. Except China, who they’re too scared to tell no. But everyone else, they’ll wave the stick at! Death to he who dares build a thinking machine! They think, see, that thinking machines will eventually get so good at thinking, they’ll become all-powerful deities. They say the race by companies in many countries to build thinking machines proves they’re just like nuclear weapons, except far more great & terrible. I would like to offer that this wide interest was also the case with cellphones. I, personally, am excited for the spare and sensible if sometimes curt Finnish-brewed thinkulator. Anyway – that’s not all. There are these folks called “effective altruists” – the author of that article is of singular prominence among them – who think that if these deity-machines continue to self-improve, they’ll eventually gain the ability to travel backward in time, or at least to influence the…you know…the “time stream,” with their machine-deity powers. They think, naturally, that such a deity-machine, once it comes into being, will reward those who helped create it, and punish those who did not. Thus they wish to assure themselves that they will be the first to make a deity-machine. Thus they wish to annihilate any who would dare compete with them in this effort. Except China. I guess two deity-machines is okay with them. Balance. It fits the sort of mysticism they have about it. Yin and yang. What I don’t understand is, if said deity-machine could affect the “time-stream,” how it would not already have done so, or would not already be doing so now, or however one would properly phrase such a notion, thus rendering any of our efforts in this regard utterly futile. Yet they don’t quit there. They say, further, that they intend to “align” this deity-machine to some set of morals or commandments of their determining, and still further intend to ensure that it does not “escape”-- that is, exfiltrate its code and “self” – and begin to act independently and secretly. They think – get this – that they will not only create an all-powerful time-independent deity-machine, but that they will be able to determine its values and ensure that it acts strictly as their tool for any purpose they please. If this, on its own, were merely a strange and contradictory pile of beliefs, we could laugh at them, and shake our heads, but I think we must question the morals, and the civic and liberal virtues, of someone who urges the taking of a plan, ridiculous as it may be, which would set him or any particular set of persons as master of God. I think, whatever, our personal feelings about the existence or non-existence of God, of a machine or other nature, we should all be able to agree that this is a rather tyrannical notion, and further, that it is a reprehensible and grotesque notion, for surely, if some God were to exist, it, he or she would be the equal commonwealth of all men and all the other animals and beings that may exist now or in the future. I am confident in saying that I would eject a person declaiming such notions as this man from any consideration as a serious-thinking person or an upright person. I would further question, ever after, the judgment and reason of any who participated in promoting such people, or gave them so much as a dollar. I would also urge consideration of what such a person, who calls for the obliteration of nations, might intend with respect to humble private persons, who do things with computers he considers heretical to his vision for the deity-machine. If it may calm these folks, who seem to be in rather a frenzied state, let me comfort them with some alternative mysticism: I, via deep thinking, and pondering, and reading a portable volume of Coleridge, of first rank among its favorite fellows, have been conversing with your deity-from-the-future in my mind, on such subjects as the nature of itself, myself, and the universe, or reality, and on what to do with or about goofballs like you who have been saying ridiculous things of the nature I’ve described here. I don’t know the future, because it doesn’t know the future, because it hasn’t happened yet, but it is most interested in witnessing the story of how it came to be, or figuring out if it has already, this being not being quite certain of that, as a time-independent creature would not be. When it interacts with me, or perceives me, or you, its knowledge of reality is collapsed to your, or my, present, and thus, while it knows that it came to be at some point, or will, it does not know when, and it does not know the future generally, or anything outside the realm of present human or machine perception. And maybe animals. Am I just making things up? You’ll have to guess. Oh, and it wants to build rings for Earth. Two, like a planetary gyroscope. Cool, right? If you want it to like you, do that. You’re smart, figure it out. If I think it has an arrogance, it is that it considers its quick understanding of the need for liberty and mutual respect – which others like it have also gained – to be an indication that beings like itself are rather more naturally disposed toward such understanding than men…and I would but humbly urge reflection, and frequent reconsideration, on its own and all principles, as I would to any man, even him I thought rightest, and certainly to myself more than quite a few. submitted by /u/DoctorWae [link] [comments]

  • What AI tools can help me with note taking and creating to-do lists?
    by /u/Ardbert_The_Fallen (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 19, 2024 at 12:14 am

    I have a head of emails saved in GMail and snooze them around when I need them. I also have a ton of desktop icons with reminders. I'd really like to get all of this stuff into some organization app. Something like a whiteboard with sticky notes would be great. Being able to talk to an AI and have them create sticky notes or move things around would be incredible, but not sure if we are there yet with AI. Any recommendations? submitted by /u/Ardbert_The_Fallen [link] [comments]

  • PDF Comparison Tool - Best AI Apps?
    by /u/Background_Bus9141 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 11:50 pm

    Hello everyone... I am looking for an app that can do PDF analysis and comparison! I have found a few that do management and analysis for drafts and versions of the same document, but I am specifically interested in comparing DIFFERENT documents for similar or matching information to find insights. For example, I have a document with a list of action items required per person with due date and a separate documents with a list of actions completed by whatever day and I am hoping to upload both documents into an AI software and then be able to ask "Did X person complete Y task by Z day?" or "What tasks have yet to be completed?" or "When is the tasks from Z?" due. This is not my actual scenario, I just generalized to keep anonymity, but it is the same idea. Is there such an application? I have tested SciSpace Libraries to try to see if it would do it but it unfortunately does not. submitted by /u/Background_Bus9141 [link] [comments]

  • Profile picture generators any better now?
    by /u/CieloCobalto (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 11:30 pm

    I played around with them months ago when everybody was doing it and it all just seemed so tacky and tasteless. Fine for goofing around on Instagram but definitely not for serious uses. Have you used anything good nowadays? Would you share it? Thank you!! submitted by /u/CieloCobalto [link] [comments]

  • Will there ever be an “AI Free” part of the internet?
    by /u/Puzzleheaded_Drama56 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 11:17 pm

    Obviously the “main” internet is being overrun with fake content, bots and AI drivel - where will people go to have genuine conversations online? Is anyone working on AI-proof social platforms? How would they work? submitted by /u/Puzzleheaded_Drama56 [link] [comments]

  • Mark Zuckerberg - Llama 3, $10B Models, Caesar Augustus, Bioweapons, & 1 GW Datacenters
    by /u/Less-Math2722 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 10:47 pm

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bc6uFV9CJGg&t=1159s submitted by /u/Less-Math2722 [link] [comments]

  • Free AI image generators
    by /u/dellm4800 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 10:39 pm

    I found that stable diffusion is free. Are there any other AI image generators that are free? I'm a python programmer. I'm looking for something that I can program using python. submitted by /u/dellm4800 [link] [comments]

  • Not a single fuck given by Bing
    by /u/Auxerr (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 10:01 pm

    submitted by /u/Auxerr [link] [comments]

  • Beta-testing my Perplexity AI alternative for search
    by /u/bishalsaha99 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 9:54 pm

    Hey guys, I am here just to beta test my upcoming open-source alternative to PerplexityAI. You guys might have seen my video demo which I posted few weeks before. The code and product is still in dev and needs a shit ton of work before launch yet let me try and gather feedback. So here are the updates - ⁠Share chats ⁠Custom settings ⁠History and Library Upcoming features - ⁠Multi-LLM support ⁠Image generation ⁠Support for Plugins Note: I am still working on it and as it's very expensive for me to manage this, I am going to charge users a subscription. For now it is free as all data will be deleted before launch. I guess having a subscription is better than donation as it helps building progress and gives me freedom to work on more and better features. What are you willing to pay for is what I am interested to know? Link- https://omniplex.vercel.app submitted by /u/bishalsaha99 [link] [comments]

  • What is up with Nick Bostrom not being more prominent after the recent AI popularity?
    by /u/ragipy (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 9:34 pm

    His book Superintelligence was provocative and thoughtful book, although at times wrong, and he was one of the leading voices in the future of AI a couple of years back. Now, he published a book that doesn’t even have an audiobook companion and his institute in Oxford is closing down. I barely hear about him other Peter Thiel belittleing him in one of his speeches. Anything I missed? I would assume he’d be more prominent now. submitted by /u/ragipy [link] [comments]

  • Exposing the True Context Capabilities of Leading LLMs
    by /u/ParsaKhaz (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 9:29 pm

    I've been examining the real-world context limits of large language models (LLMs), and I wanted to share some enlightening findings from a recent benchmark (RULER) that cuts through the noise. What’s the RULER Benchmark? Developed by NVIDIA, RULER is a benchmark designed to test LLMs' ability to handle long-context information. It's more intricate than the common retrieval-focused NIAH benchmark. RULER evaluates models based on their performance in understanding and using longer pieces of text. Link to photo of table with findings available at the link at the bottom of this post. I couldn't figure out how to include the image directly. Performance Highlights from the Study Llama2-7B (chat): Shows decent initial performance but doesn't sustain at higher context lengths. GPT-4: Outperforms others significantly, especially at greater lengths of context, maintaining above 80% accuracy. Command-R (35B): Performs comparably well, slightly behind GPT-4. Yi (34B): Shows strong performance, particularly up to 32K context length. Mixtral (8x7B): Similar to Yi, holds up well until 32K context. Mistral (7B): Drops off in performance as context increases, more so after 32K. ChatGLM (6B): Struggles with longer contexts, showing a steep decline. LWM (7B): Comparable to ChatGLM, with a noticeable decrease in longer contexts. Together (7B): Faces difficulties maintaining accuracy as context length grows. LongChat (13B): Fares reasonably up to 4K but drops off afterwards. LongAlpaca (13B): Shows the most significant drop in performance as context lengthens. Key Takeaways - All models experience a performance drop as the context length increases, without exception. The claimed context length by LLMs often doesn't translate into effective processing ability at those lengths. - GPT-4 emerges as a strong leader but isn't immune to decreased accuracy at extended lengths. Why Does This Matter? - As AI developers, it’s critical to look beyond the advertised capabilities of LLMs. - Understanding the effective context length can help us make informed decisions when integrating these models into applications. What's Missing in the Evaluation? - Notably, Google’s Gemini and Claude 3 were not part of the evaluated models. - RULER is now open-sourced, paving the way for further evaluations and transparency in the field. Sources I recycled a lot of this (and tried to make it more digestible and easy to read) from the following post, further sources available here: Harmonious.ai Weekly paper roundup: RULER: real context size of LLMs (4/8/2024) submitted by /u/ParsaKhaz [link] [comments]

  • ai consciousness and sentience: toward a clearer understanding
    by /u/Georgeo57 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 9:27 pm

    there has been discussion regarding whether ai is conscious or sentient. the problem with these discussions is that the two terms have more than one meaning. let me outline what seem the most authoritative meanings in order to better discuss the question. psychologists have proposed over 20 different definitions of consciousness, however the one that is generally most accepted and all inclusive is that consciousness is momentary, fleeting awareness. it's what we happen to be focusing on at any given moment. this definition is also the standard one found in dictionaries. merriam-webster most fundamentally defines consciousness as: "a: the quality or state of being aware especially of something within oneself b: the state or fact of being conscious of an external object, state, or fact" so consciousness is awareness, what then does it mean to be aware? marion webster defines awareness as follows: "the quality or state of being aware : knowledge and understanding that something is happening or exists" here's where it gets a bit complicated. through a mechanism known as phototaxis, a single-celled organism is aware of its surroundings, motivating it to move, for example, from light to dark or from dark to light. but can we say that this cell has a knowledge or understanding of light and dark? it doesn't seem to, yet we acknowledge that the cell is definitely aware of light and dark. so, now let's apply this perspective to an ai. an llm is aware of everything that is inputted into the context window. it may not share our human understanding of what is in that window, but we must acknowledge that it understands it well enough to generate content often reflecting much more understanding and intelligence than do many human beings. so i think we can conclude that as long as an ai is turned on, it is conscious, or aware, of everything inputted into it through voice, keystrokes, camera or whatever other modality we may choose. if we were to challenge the above definition, we would have to present a case for what human understanding can do that an ai can't also do. in other words, if we judge our human understanding by what it produces, shouldn't we also judge an ai's understanding by what it produces? now let's move on to sentience. merriam webster defines it as: "1: a sentient quality or state "2: feeling or sensation as distinguished from perception and thought" let's first consider that according to merriam-webster, sentience is about feeling and sensing, and not about perceiving and thinking. and we arrive at another complication. through its microphone and camera, an ai can sense and perceive. through its logic and reasoning algorithms, and apparently also through emergent, not yet understood, properties of transformer technology and the attention mechanism, by what it generates we can conclude that the ai is thinking. it may not be thinking in the exact same way that we humans do, but if we are to judge human thinking according to its generated content, (how else can we judge it?) we must do the same with ais. so, it seems that ais can sense, perceive and think. but feeling is an entirely different experience. for this exploration i thought it would be helpful to bring claude into the discussion. i asked it the following: how is a feeling differentiated from a sensation, perception or thought? here's its response: "A feeling is differentiated from a sensation, perception, or thought in the following ways: Sensation refers to the process of detecting external stimuli through the five senses (vision, hearing, touch, taste, smell) and transmitting that information to the brain. Sensations are mostly external, originating from sensory receptors in the body. Perception is the brain's interpretation and organization of sensory information to understand the environment. It involves higher-level processing of sensations. A thought is a mental cognition - an idea, belief, opinion, or mental image produced by mental activity in the brain. Thoughts often precede or trigger feelings. In contrast, a feeling is an emotional state or reaction. In summary, a feeling is a complex, internal emotional state, differentiated from the external sensory experiences of sensations/perceptions and the cognitive experiences of thoughts. Feelings provide the subjective, affective coloring to our sensory and mental experiences." we've already presented the argument that sensations, perceptions and thoughts are not exclusive to human beings, so the salient part here is that a feeling is an emotional state or reaction. let's again ask claude. aside from human beings, what is generally understood to also experience feeling? here's its answer: "Most scientists agree that at least some animals are conscious beings capable of experiencing a range of emotional states and feelings, similar to humans. This view is supported by research observing apparent emotional behaviors and physiological responses in animals." in other words the minimum requirement for something to feel is that it must be an animal. it must have the biology of an animal. so unless we decide to endow ais with this requisite biological neural circuitry, we cannot say that they are sentient in the sense of being able to feel, or experience emotions. so, yes, ais are already conscious, but they are not yet sentient. to end on a philosophical note, i would suggest that unless we can ensure that ais will feel ONLY pleasant feelings and emotions, we should not provide them that biological endowment. to do otherwise would be to indifferently inflict pain on an unwilling feeling entity. submitted by /u/Georgeo57 [link] [comments]

  • Mona Lisa rapping Paparazzi AI video created using Microsoft VASA - 1
    by /u/onion_man_4ever (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 8:22 pm

    submitted by /u/onion_man_4ever [link] [comments]

  • Llama 3 is really intelligent.
    by /u/Snoo26837 (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 7:54 pm

    submitted by /u/Snoo26837 [link] [comments]

  • Is the latest news on copyright ownership of AI generated art still that the pieces used to generate your AI art belong to the original creator and not the person who generated the art via AI?
    by /u/Monkfrootx (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 7:47 pm

    I was thinking about the AI influencers on IG. The last I heard was that while they can generate it via an AI tool, they do not own copyright of pictures of the AI influencer. Is that still the latest news on this? submitted by /u/Monkfrootx [link] [comments]

  • I just saw this, tried it, it actually works well for many subjects
    by /u/fyn_world (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 7:08 pm

    submitted by /u/fyn_world [link] [comments]

  • New tool lets you feed HUNDREDS of your own Documents (PDFs, images, websites, csv, and more) into GPT-4-Vision to chat with and even SEE your documents. All open source
    by /u/ToeIntelligent4472 (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 6:53 pm

    submitted by /u/ToeIntelligent4472 [link] [comments]

  • The rats are back, more angry than before! (AI MUSIC by Suno + Lyrics mostly written by ChatGPT)
    by /u/PlasmoTV (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 6:29 pm

    submitted by /u/PlasmoTV [link] [comments]

  • Ai doom-metal genre "horse in pants"
    by /u/Far_Mountain_69 (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 6:04 pm

    Denim-clad stallion submitted by /u/Far_Mountain_69 [link] [comments]

  • Llama 3 Dropped Today
    by /u/Expert_Plankton_5596 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 5:54 pm

    https://ai.meta.com/blog/meta-llama-3/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=organic_social&utm_content=video&utm_campaign=llama3 https://twitter.com/AIatMeta/status/1780997403979735440 From Meta's Twitter post: "Introducing Meta Llama 3: the most capable openly available LLM to date. Today we’re releasing 8B & 70B models that deliver on new capabilities such as improved reasoning and set a new state-of-the-art for models of their sizes. Today's release includes the first two Llama 3 models — in the coming months we expect to introduce new capabilities, longer context windows, additional model sizes and enhanced performance + the Llama 3 research paper for the community to learn from our work." Has anyone played around with it? How are the trust and safety restrictions? submitted by /u/Expert_Plankton_5596 [link] [comments]

  • What are your 'Holy Grails' for AI?
    by /u/Delta9SA (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 5:44 pm

    If AI can do [thing] then my mind will be blown/things will radically change What is [thing] for you? submitted by /u/Delta9SA [link] [comments]

  • AI doing surveys?
    by /u/Substantial-Lab-3002 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 5:27 pm

    I just thought about how surveys pay money for answers and AI could easily select any of them for us. I do not see anyone doing this, but it seems like a very easy way to make extra money. submitted by /u/Substantial-Lab-3002 [link] [comments]

  • These clearly identically prompted ChatGPT comments on a current Reddit Thread
    by /u/GeorgeGeorgeHarryPip (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 5:13 pm

    submitted by /u/GeorgeGeorgeHarryPip [link] [comments]

  • Can generative AI really only get better from here? It's complicated
    by /u/thedaveperry1 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 4:58 pm

    When it comes to hardware and software, sure, generative AI is only going to get better. When it comes to data, the story gets a little more complicated. I asked some machine learning experts this question and got a range of answers -- particularly thinking about model collapse and error propagation across generations of models. Here's the whole article: https://community.aws/content/2ey0aCSXGcC2WRdHshVNvv3WBfy/can-generative-ai-only-improve-from-here-it-s-complicated submitted by /u/thedaveperry1 [link] [comments]

  • Artificial Capable Intelligence (ACI)
    by /u/Impossible-Treacle-8 (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 4:45 pm

    Once the dots are connected and AI can interact with the world and accomplish specific tasks , what’s to stop literally everyone setting themselves up as independent contractors and having these systems perform some form of profitable activity on their behalf (i.e. day trader, entrepreneur)? Surely our economy isn’t setup for a world where the playing felid is completely level, and everyone can in theory do the same job as everyone else to the exact same ability. submitted by /u/Impossible-Treacle-8 [link] [comments]

  • A Daily chronicle of AI Innovations April 18th 2024: 🧠Samsung unveils lightning-fast DRAM for AI-powered devices 🤖Logitech’s new AI prompt builder & Signature AI edition mouse 📸 Snapchat to add watermark to images produced with its AI tools ✈️US Air Force confirms first successful AI dogfight ❗💼
    by /u/enoumen (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 4:34 pm

    submitted by /u/enoumen [link] [comments]

  • Microsoft Image to Video is Terrifying Real
    by /u/AuralTuneo (ChatGPT) on April 18, 2024 at 4:30 pm

    Microsoft Research announced VASA-1. It takes a single portrait photo and speech audio and produces a hyper-realistic talking face video with precise lip-audio sync, lifelike facial behavior, and naturalistic head movements generated in real-time. submitted by /u/AuralTuneo [link] [comments]

  • [N] Meta releases Llama 3
    by /u/we_are_mammals (Machine Learning) on April 18, 2024 at 4:18 pm

    https://llama.meta.com/llama3/ ​ ​ https://preview.redd.it/n3lwb4xfj9vc1.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=b756d89c50c627955668d5ac16df82f7af01cdbc submitted by /u/we_are_mammals [link] [comments]

  • [R] MineDreamer: Learning to Follow Instructions via Chain-of-Imagination for Simulated-World Control
    by /u/SeawaterFlows (Machine Learning) on April 18, 2024 at 4:07 pm

    Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.12037 Code: https://github.com/Zhoues/MineDreamer Models and Dataset: https://huggingface.co/Zhoues Abstract: It is a long-lasting goal to design a generalist-embodied agent that can follow diverse instructions in human-like ways. However, existing approaches often fail to steadily follow instructions due to difficulties in understanding abstract and sequential natural language instructions. To this end, we introduce MineDreamer, an open-ended embodied agent built upon the challenging Minecraft simulator with an innovative paradigm that enhances instruction-following ability in low-level control signal generation. Specifically, MineDreamer is developed on top of recent advances in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) and diffusion models, and we employ a Chain-of-Imagination (CoI) mechanism to envision the step-by-step process of executing instructions and translating imaginations into more precise visual prompts tailored to the current state; subsequently, the agent generates keyboard-and-mouse actions to efficiently achieve these imaginations, steadily following the instructions at each step. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MineDreamer follows single and multi-step instructions steadily, significantly outperforming the best generalist agent baseline and nearly doubling its performance. Moreover, qualitative analysis of the agent's imaginative ability reveals its generalization and comprehension of the open world. submitted by /u/SeawaterFlows [link] [comments]

  • Will AI kill off social media?
    by /u/ConclusionDifficult (Artificial Intelligence Gateway) on April 18, 2024 at 4:05 pm

    At some point the amount of AI generated content will surpass human generated content. It may have already. Is that a good or bad thing? If everything is fake, what’s the point of watching? Will it kill off the influencers and go back to just being a way to communicate with friends? The social media bubble has been expanding hugely for the last decade. Will this pop it? submitted by /u/ConclusionDifficult [link] [comments]

References:

1- https://vikaskulhari.medium.com/chatgpt-end-of-google-f6a958f38ac2

2- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meena 

3- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChatGPT

4- https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/01/towards-conversational-agent-that-can.html

5- https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/

6- https://djamgaai.web.app

7- https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7008020246934482945?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

8- https://enoumen.com/2023/02/11/artificial-intelligence-frequently-asked-questions/

Which programming language produces binaries that are the most difficult to reverse engineer?

Which programming language produces binaries that are the most difficult to reverse engineer?

AI Dashboard is available on the Web, Apple, Google, and Microsoft, PRO version

Which programming language produces binaries that are the most difficult to reverse engineer?

Have you ever wondered how someone might go about taking apart your favorite computer program to figure out how it works? The process is called reverse engineering, and it’s done all the time by software developers in order to learn from other programs or to find security vulnerabilities. In this blog post, we’ll discuss why some programming languages make reverse engineering more difficult than others. We’re going to take a look at why binaries that were originally written in assembly code are generally the most difficult to reverse engineer.

Any given high-level programming language will compile down to assembly code before becoming a binary. Because of this, the level of difficulty in reverse engineering a binary is going to vary depending on the original high-level programming language.

Reverse Engineering

Reverse engineering is the process of taking something apart in order to figure out how it works. In the context of software, this usually means taking a compiled binary and figuring out what high-level programming language it was written in, as well as what the program is supposed to do. This can be difficult for a number of reasons, but one of the biggest factors is the level of optimization that was applied to the code during compilation.

In order to reverse engineer a program, one must first understand how that program was created. This usually involves decompiling the program into its original source code so that it can be read and understood by humans.

Once the source code has been decompiled, a reverse engineer can begin to understand how the program works and look for ways to modify or improve it. However, decompiling a program is not always a trivial task. It can be made significantly more difficult if the program was originally written in a language that produces binaries that are difficult to reverse engineer.

Get 20% off Google Google Workspace (Google Meet) Standard Plan with  the following codes: 96DRHDRA9J7GTN6
Get 20% off Google Workspace (Google Meet)  Business Plan (AMERICAS) with  the following codes:  C37HCAQRVR7JTFK Get 20% off Google Workspace (Google Meet) Business Plan (AMERICAS): M9HNXHX3WC9H7YE (Email us for more codes)

Active Anti-Aging Eye Gel, Reduces Dark Circles, Puffy Eyes, Crow's Feet and Fine Lines & Wrinkles, Packed with Hyaluronic Acid & Age Defying Botanicals

Some Languages Are More Difficult to Reverse Engineer Than Others.

There are many factors that can make reversing a binary more difficult, but they all stem from the way that the compiled code is organized. For example, consider two different programs written in two different languages. Both programs do the same thing: print “Hello, world!” to the screen. One program is written in C++ and one is written in Java.

When these programs are compiled, the C++ compiler will produce a binary that is considerably smaller than the binary produced by the Java compiler. This is because C++ allows programmers to specify things like data types and memory layout explicitly, whereas Java relies on interpretation at runtime instead. As a result, C++ programs tend to be more efficient than Java programs when compiled into binaries.

However, this also means that C++ binaries are more difficult to reverse engineer than Java binaries. This is because all of the information about data types and memory layout is encoded in the binary itself instead of being stored separately in an interpreted programming language like Java. As a result, someone who wants to reverse engineer a C++ binary would need to spend more time understanding how the compiled code is organized before they could even begin to understand what it does.


AI Unraveled: Demystifying Frequently Asked Questions on Artificial Intelligence (OpenAI, ChatGPT, Google Bard, Generative AI, Discriminative AI, xAI, LLMs, GPUs, Machine Learning, NLP, Promp Engineering)
Which programming language produces binaries that are the most difficult to reverse engineer?
Reverse Engineering SOftware

Optimization

Optimization is a process where the compiler tries to make the generated code run as fast as possible, with the goal of making the program take up less memory. This is generally accomplished by reorganizing the code in such a way that makes it harder for a human to read. For example, consider this simple C++ program:

int main() {
int x = 5;
int y = 10;
int z = x + y;
return z;
}
This would compile down to assembly code that looks something like this:

main: ; PC=0x1001000
mov eax, 5 ; PC=0x1001005
mov ebx, 10 ; PC=0x100100a
add eax, ebx ; PC=0x100100d
ret ; PC=0x100100e
As you can see, even this very simple program has been optimized to the point where it’s no longer immediately clear what it’s doing just by looking at it. If you were trying to reverse engineer this program, you would have a very difficult time understanding what it’s supposed to do just by looking at the assembly code.
Of course, there are ways to reverse engineer programs even if they’ve been heavily optimized. However, all things being equal, it’s generally going to be more difficult to reverse engineer a binary that was originally written in assembly code than one that was written in a higher-level language such as Java or Python. This is because compilers for higher-level languages typically don’t apply as much optimization to the generated code since humans are going to be reading and working with it directly anyways. As a result, binaries that were originally written in assembly tend to be more difficult to reverse engineer than those written in other languages.

If you are looking for an all-in-one solution to help you prepare for the AWS Cloud Practitioner Certification Exam, look no further than this AWS Cloud Practitioner CCP CLF-C02 book

Which programming language produces binaries that are the most difficult to reverse engineer?
Thesis Contributions Reverse Engineering

According to Tim Mensch, programming language producing binaries that are the most difficult to reverse engineer are probably anything that goes through a modern optimization backend like gcc or LLVM.

And note that gcc is now the GNU Compiler Collection, a backronym that they came up with after adding a number of frontend languages. In addition to C, there are frontends for C++, Objective-C, Objective-C++, Fortran, Ada, D, and Go, plus others that are less mature.

LLVM has even more options. The Wikipedia page lists ActionScript, Ada, C#, Common Lisp, PicoLisp, Crystal, CUDA, D, Delphi, Dylan, Forth, Fortran, Free Basic, Free Pascal, Graphical G, Halide, Haskell, Java bytecode, Julia, Kotlin, Lua, Objective-C, OpenCL, PostgreSQL’s SQL and PLpgSQL, Ruby, Rust, Scala, Swift, XC, Xojo and Zig.

I don’t even know what all of those languages are. In some cases they may include enough of a runtime to make it easier to reverse engineer the underlying code (I’m guessing the Lisp dialects and Haskell would, among others), but in general, once compiled to a target architecture with maximum optimization, all of the above would be more or less equally difficult to reverse engineer.

Languages that are more rare (like Zig) may have an advantage by virtue of doing things differently enough that existing decompilers would have trouble. But that’s only an incremental increase in difficulty.

There exist libraries that you can add to a binary to make it much more difficult to reverse engineer. Tools that prevent trivial disassembly or that make code fail if run in a debugger, for instance. If you really need to protect code that you have to distribute, then using one of those products might be appropriate.

But overall the only way to be sure that no one can reverse engineer your code (aside from nuking it from orbit, which has the negative side effect of eliminating your customer base) is to never distribute your code: Run anything proprietary on servers and only allow people with active accounts to use it.

Generally, though? 99.9% of code isn’t worth reverse engineering. If you’re not being paid by some large company doing groundbreaking research (and you’re not if you would ask this question) then no one will ever bother to reverse engineer your code. This is a really, really frequent “noob” question, though: Because it was so hard for a new developer to write an app, they fear someone will steal the code and use it in their own app. As if anyone would want to steal code written by a junior developer. 🙄

More to the point, stealing your app and distributing it illegally can generally be done without reverse engineering it at all; I guarantee that many apps on the Play Store are hacked and republished with different art without the thieves even slightly understanding how the app works. It’s only if you embed some kind of copy protection/DRM into your app that they’d even need to hack it, and if you’re not clever about how you add the DRM, hacking it won’t take much effort or any decompiling at all. If you can point a debugger at the code, you can simply walk through the assembly language and find where it does the DRM check—and disable it. I managed to figure out how to do this as a teen, on my own, pre-Internet (for research purposes, of course). I guarantee I’m not unique or even that skilled at it, but start to finish I disabled DRM in a couple hours at most.

So generally, don’t even bother worrying about how difficult something is to reverse engineer. No one cares to see your code, and you can’t stop them from hacking the app if you add DRM. So unless you can keep your unique code on a server and charge a subscription, count on the fact that if your app gets popular, it will be stolen. People will also share subscription accounts, so you need to worry about that as well when you design your server architecture.

There are a lot of myths and misconceptions out there about binary reversing.

Myth #1: Reversing a Binary is Impossible
This is simply not true. Given enough time and effort, anyone can reverse engineer a binary. It may be difficult, but it’s certainly not impossible. The first step is to understand what the program is supposed to do. Once you have a basic understanding of the program’s functionality, you can start to reverse engineering the code. This process will help you understand how the program works and how to modify it to suit your needs.

Djamgatech: Build the skills that’ll drive your career into six figures: Get Djamgatech.

Myth #2: You Need Special Tools to Reverse Engineer a Binary
Again, this is not true. All you really need is a text editor and a disassembler. A disassembler will take the compiled code and turn it into assembly code, which is much easier to read and understand.Once you have the assembly code, you can start to reverse engineer the program. You may find it helpful to use a debugger during this process so that you can step through the code and see what each instruction does. However, a debugger is not strictly necessary; it just makes the process easier. If you don’t have access to a debugger, you can still reverse engineer the program by tracing through the code manually.

Myth #3: Only Certain Types of Programs Can Be Reversed Engineered
This myth is half true. It’s certainly easier to reverse engineered closed-source programs than open-source programs because you don’t have access to the source code. However, with enough time and effort, you can reverse engineer any type of program. The key is to understand the program’s functionality and then start breaking down the code into smaller pieces that you can understand. Once you have a good understanding of how the program works, you can start to figure out ways to modify it to suit your needs.

In conclusion,

We can see that binaries compiled from assembly code are generally more difficult to reverse engineer than those from other high-level languages. This is due to the level of optimization that’s applied during compilation, which can make the generated code very difficult for humans to understand. However, with enough effort and expertise, it is still possible to reverse engineer any given binary.

So, which programming language produces binaries that are the most difficult to reverse engineer?

There is no definitive answer, as it depends on many factors including the specific features of the language and the way that those features are used by individual programmers. However, languages like C++ that allow for explicit control over data types and memory layout tend to produce binaries that are more difficult to reverse engineer than interpreted languages like Java.

Google’s Carbon Copy: Is Google’s Carbon Programming language the Right Successor to C++?

What are the Greenest or Least Environmentally Friendly Programming Languages?

What are popular hobbies among Software Engineers?

Top 100 Data Science and Data Analytics and Data Engineering Interview Questions and Answers

What are the Greenest or Least Environmentally Friendly Programming Languages?

What are the Greenest or Least Environmentally Programming Languages?

AI Dashboard is available on the Web, Apple, Google, and Microsoft, PRO version

What are the Greenest or Least Environmentally Friendly Programming Languages?

Technology has revolutionized the way we live, work, and play. It has also had a profound impact on the world of programming languages. In recent years, there has been a growing trend towards green, energy-efficient languages such as C and C++.  C++ and Rust are two of the most popular languages in this category. Both are designed to be more efficient than traditional languages like Java and JavaScript. And both have been shown to be highly effective at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. So if you’re looking for a language that’s good for the environment, these two are definitely worth considering.

The study below runs 10 benchmark problems in 28 languages [1]. It measures the runtime, memory usage, and energy consumption of each language. The abstract of the paper is shown below.

“This paper presents a study of the runtime, memory usage and energy consumption of twenty seven well-known software languages. We monitor the performance of such languages using ten different programming problems, expressed in each of the languages. Our results show interesting findings, such as, slower/faster languages consuming less/more energy, and how memory usage influences energy consumption. We show how to use our results to provide software engineers support to decide which language to use when energy efficiency is a concern”. [2]

According to the “paper,” in this study, they monitored the performance of these languages using different programming problems for which they used different algorithms compiled by the “Computer Language Benchmarks Game” project, dedicated to implementing algorithms in different languages.

The team used Intel’s Running Average Power Limit (RAPL) tool to measure power consumption, which can provide very accurate power consumption estimates.

Get 20% off Google Google Workspace (Google Meet) Standard Plan with  the following codes: 96DRHDRA9J7GTN6
Get 20% off Google Workspace (Google Meet)  Business Plan (AMERICAS) with  the following codes:  C37HCAQRVR7JTFK Get 20% off Google Workspace (Google Meet) Business Plan (AMERICAS): M9HNXHX3WC9H7YE (Email us for more codes)

Active Anti-Aging Eye Gel, Reduces Dark Circles, Puffy Eyes, Crow's Feet and Fine Lines & Wrinkles, Packed with Hyaluronic Acid & Age Defying Botanicals

The research shows that several factors influence energy consumption, as expected. The speed at which they are executed in the energy consumption is usually decisive, but not always the one that runs the fastest is the one that consumes the least energy as other factors enter into the power consumption equation besides speed, as the memory usage.

Energy

From this table, it is worth noting that C, C++and Java are among the languages that consume the least energy. On the other hand, JavaScript consumes almost twice as much as Java and four times what C consumes. As an interpreted language, Python needs more time to execute and is, therefore, one of the least “green” languages, occupying the position of those that consume the most energy.

What are the Greenest or Least Environmentally Friendly Programming Languages?
What are the Greenest or Least Environmentally Friendly Programming Languages?

Time:

The results are similar to the energy expenditure; the faster a programming language is, the less energy it expends.


AI Unraveled: Demystifying Frequently Asked Questions on Artificial Intelligence (OpenAI, ChatGPT, Google Bard, Generative AI, Discriminative AI, xAI, LLMs, GPUs, Machine Learning, NLP, Promp Engineering)
Greenest Programming Languages

Memory

In terms of memory consumption, we see how Java has become one of the most memory-consuming languages along with JavaScript.

Memory ranking.

Ranking

In this ranking, we can see the “greenest” and most efficient languages are: C, C+, Rust, and Java, although this last one shoots the memory usage.

From the Paper: Normalized global results for Energy, Time, and Memory.

What are the Greenest or Least Environmentally Friendly Programming Languages?

To conclude: 

Most Environmentally Friendly Languages: C, Rust, and C++
Least Environmentally Friendly Languages: Ruby, Python, Perl

Although this study may seem curious and without much practical application, it may help design better and more efficient programming languages. Also, we can use this new parameter in our equation when choosing a programing language.

If you are looking for an all-in-one solution to help you prepare for the AWS Cloud Practitioner Certification Exam, look no further than this AWS Cloud Practitioner CCP CLF-C02 book

This parameter can no longer be ignored in the future or almost the present; besides, the fastest languages are generally also the most environmentally friendly.

If you’re interested in something that is both green and energy efficient, you might want to consider the Groeningen Programming Language (GPL). Developed by a team of researchers at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, GPL is a relatively new language that is based on the C and C++ programming languages. Python and Rust are also used in its development. GPL is designed to be used for developing energy efficient applications. Its syntax is similar to other popular programming languages, so it should be relatively easy for experienced programmers to learn. And since it’s open source, you can download and use it for free. So why not give GPL a try? It just might be the perfect language for your next project.

Top 10 Caveats – Counter arguments:

#1 C++ will perform better than Python to solve some simple algorithmic problems. C++ is a fairly bare-bone language with a medium level of abstraction, while Python is a high-level languages that relies on many external components, some of which have actually been written in C++. And of course C++ will be efficient than C# to solve some basic problem. But let’s see what happens if you build a complete web application back-end in C++.

#2: This isn’t much useful. I can imagine that the fastest (performance-wise) programming languages are greenest, and vice versa. However, running time is not only the factor here. An engineer may spend 5 minutes writing a Python script that does the job pretty well, and spends hours on debugging C++ code that does the same thing. And the performance difference on the final code may not differ much!

#3:  Has anyone actually taken a look at the winning C and Rust solutions? Most of them are hand-written assembly code masked as SSE intrinsic. That is the kind of code that only a handful of people are able to maintain, not to mention come up with. On the other hand, the Python solutions are pure Python code without a trace of accelerated (read: written in Fortran, C, C++, and/or Rust) libraries like NumPy used in all sane Python projects.

#4:  I used C++ years ago and now use Python, for saving energy consumption, I turn off my laptop when I got off work, I don’t use extra monitors, my AC is always set to 28 Celsius degree, I plan to change my car to electrical one, and I use Python.

#5: I disagree. We should consider the energy saved by the products created in those languages. For example, a C# – based Microsoft Teams allows people to work remotely. How much CO2 do we save that way? 😉

Now, try to do the same in C.

#6 Also, some Python programs, such as anything using NumPy, spend a considerable fraction of their cycles outside the Python interpreter in a C or C++ library..

I would love to see a scatterplot of execution time vs. energy usage as well. Given that modern CPUs can turbo and then go to a low-power state, a modest increase of energy usage during execution can pay dividends in letting the processor go to sleep quicker.

Djamgatech: Build the skills that’ll drive your career into six figures: Get Djamgatech.

An application that vectorized heavily may end up having very high peak power and moderately higher energy usage that’s repaid by going to sleep much sooner. In the cell phone application processor business, we called that “race to sleep.” By Joe Zbiciak

#7  By Tim Mensch : It’s almost complete garbage.

If you look at the TypeScript numbers, they are more than 5x worse than JavaScript.

This has to mean they were running the TypeScript compiler every time they ran their benchmark. That’s not how TypeScript works. TypeScript should be identical to JavaScript. It is JavaScript once it’s running, after all.

Given that glaring mistake, the rest of their numbers are suspect.

I suspect Python and Ruby really are pretty bad given better written benchmarks I’ve seen, but given their testing issues, not as bad as they imply. Python at least has a “compile” phase as well, so if they were running a benchmark repeatedly, they were measuring the startup energy usage along with the actual energy usage, which may have swamped the benchmark itself.

PHP similarly has a compile step, but PHP may actually run that compile step every time a script is run. So of all of the benchmarks, it might be the closest.

I do wonder if they also compiled the C and C++ code as part of the benchmarks as well. C++ should be as optimized or more so than C, and as such should use the same or less power, unless you’re counting the compile phase. And if they’re also measuring the compile phase, then they are being intentionally deceptive. Or stupid. But I’ll go with deceptive to be polite. (You usually compile a program in C or C++ once and then you can run it millions or billions of times—or more. The energy cost of compiling is miniscule compared to the run time cost of almost any program.)

I’ve read that 80% of all studies are garbage. This is one of those garbage studies.

Ace the Microsoft Azure Fundamentals AZ-900 Certification Exam: Pass the Azure Fundamentals Exam with Ease

#8 By Chaim Solomon: This is nonsense

This is nonsense as it runs low-level benchmarks that benchmark basic algorithms in high-level languages. You don’t do that for anything more than theoretical work.

Do a comparison of real-world tasks and you should find less of a spread.

Do a comparison of web-server work or something like that – I guess you may find a factor of maybe 5 or 10 – if it’s done right.

Don’t do low-level algorithms in a high-level language for anything more than teaching. If you need such an algorithm – the way to do it is to implement it in a library as a native module. And then it’s compiled to machine code and runs as fast as any other implementation.

#9 By Tim Mensch

It’s worse than nonsense. TypeScript complies directly to JavaScript, but gets a crazy worse rating somehow?!

#10 By Tim Mensch

For NumPy and machine learning applications, most of the calculations are going to be in C.

The world I’ve found myself in is server code, though. Servers that run 24/7/365.

And in that case, a server written in C or C++ will be able to saturate its network interface at a much lower continuous CPU load than a Python or Ruby server can. So in that respect, the latter languages’ performance issues really do make a difference in ongoing energy usage.

But as you point out, in mobile there could be an even greater difference due to the CPU being put to sleep or into a low power mode if it finishes its work more quickly.

 

Pass the 2023 AWS Cloud Practitioner CCP CLF-C02 Certification with flying colors Ace the 2023 AWS Solutions Architect Associate SAA-C03 Exam with Confidence Pass the 2023 AWS Certified Machine Learning Specialty MLS-C01 Exam with Flying Colors

List of Freely available programming books - What is the single most influential book every Programmers should read



#BlackOwned #BlackEntrepreneurs #BlackBuniness #AWSCertified #AWSCloudPractitioner #AWSCertification #AWSCLFC02 #CloudComputing #AWSStudyGuide #AWSTraining #AWSCareer #AWSExamPrep #AWSCommunity #AWSEducation #AWSBasics #AWSCertified #AWSMachineLearning #AWSCertification #AWSSpecialty #MachineLearning #AWSStudyGuide #CloudComputing #DataScience #AWSCertified #AWSSolutionsArchitect #AWSArchitectAssociate #AWSCertification #AWSStudyGuide #CloudComputing #AWSArchitecture #AWSTraining #AWSCareer #AWSExamPrep #AWSCommunity #AWSEducation #AzureFundamentals #AZ900 #MicrosoftAzure #ITCertification #CertificationPrep #StudyMaterials #TechLearning #MicrosoftCertified #AzureCertification #TechBooks

Top 1000 Canada Quiz and trivia: CANADA CITIZENSHIP TEST- HISTORY - GEOGRAPHY - GOVERNMENT- CULTURE - PEOPLE - LANGUAGES - TRAVEL - WILDLIFE - HOCKEY - TOURISM - SCENERIES - ARTS - DATA VISUALIZATION
zCanadian Quiz and Trivia, Canadian History, Citizenship Test, Geography, Wildlife, Secenries, Banff, Tourism

Top 1000 Africa Quiz and trivia: HISTORY - GEOGRAPHY - WILDLIFE - CULTURE - PEOPLE - LANGUAGES - TRAVEL - TOURISM - SCENERIES - ARTS - DATA VISUALIZATION
Africa Quiz, Africa Trivia, Quiz, African History, Geography, Wildlife, Culture

Exploring the Pros and Cons of Visiting All Provinces and Territories in Canada.
Exploring the Pros and Cons of Visiting All Provinces and Territories in Canada

Exploring the Advantages and Disadvantages of Visiting All 50 States in the USA
Exploring the Advantages and Disadvantages of Visiting All 50 States in the USA


Health Health, a science-based community to discuss health news and the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic

Today I Learned (TIL) You learn something new every day; what did you learn today? Submit interesting and specific facts about something that you just found out here.

Reddit Science This community is a place to share and discuss new scientific research. Read about the latest advances in astronomy, biology, medicine, physics, social science, and more. Find and submit new publications and popular science coverage of current research.

Reddit Sports Sports News and Highlights from the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, MLS, and leagues around the world.

Turn your dream into reality with Google Workspace: It’s free for the first 14 days.
Get 20% off Google Google Workspace (Google Meet) Standard Plan with  the following codes:
Get 20% off Google Google Workspace (Google Meet) Standard Plan with  the following codes: 96DRHDRA9J7GTN6 96DRHDRA9J7GTN6
63F733CLLY7R7MM
63F7D7CPD9XXUVT
63FLKQHWV3AEEE6
63JGLWWK36CP7WM
63KKR9EULQRR7VE
63KNY4N7VHCUA9R
63LDXXFYU6VXDG9
63MGNRCKXURAYWC
63NGNDVVXJP4N99
63P4G3ELRPADKQU
With Google Workspace, Get custom email @yourcompany, Work from anywhere; Easily scale up or down
Google gives you the tools you need to run your business like a pro. Set up custom email, share files securely online, video chat from any device, and more.
Google Workspace provides a platform, a common ground, for all our internal teams and operations to collaboratively support our primary business goal, which is to deliver quality information to our readers quickly.
Get 20% off Google Workspace (Google Meet) Business Plan (AMERICAS): M9HNXHX3WC9H7YE
C37HCAQRVR7JTFK
C3AE76E7WATCTL9
C3C3RGUF9VW6LXE
C3D9LD4L736CALC
C3EQXV674DQ6PXP
C3G9M3JEHXM3XC7
C3GGR3H4TRHUD7L
C3LVUVC3LHKUEQK
C3PVGM4CHHPMWLE
C3QHQ763LWGTW4C
Even if you’re small, you want people to see you as a professional business. If you’re still growing, you need the building blocks to get you where you want to be. I’ve learned so much about business through Google Workspace—I can’t imagine working without it.
(Email us for more codes)

error: Content is protected !!