> If it's not already obvious, LLMs are going to be doing most of the mental work currently performed by doctors, lawyers, accountants, etc.
While I don't know you personally and I'm not talking about you specifically, "just" feeling very excited about something doesn't Make This About You, the prognostications don't actually help you Be a Part of This.
This is the same energy as being really into COVID-19 (what was it called, "corona-scrolling?"), the gambling-fueled crypto boom, the retail stock trading booms. It's kind of adjacent to the fallacy Feelings that are More Strongly Held Are More Valid.
It's like you could use these things as a barometer for the health of a social media channel.
Anyway, I'm sure there's a name for this part of the hype cycle - tapping into how people want to be a part of the number one biggest, hottest trend by, at the very least, talking about it all the time, trying to compete against each other by sucking the most air out of all rooms through ever-greater hyperbole.
One thing's for sure: there's some guy who found some massive low hanging fruit in some neural network designs by carefully choosing brackets in chained matrix multiplications. That's one guy, and he definitely Made It About Him in a way that makes sense. How many people on Earth have enough knowledge to see things like that, maybe 1,000-10,000? It's so exclusive, in a sense.
I guess my point is, you're pretty far off the mark. In the interest of curiosity: Standard practice in medicine is to examine the patient before giving an opinion, a big roadblock for even the most competent of multi-modal models. Also, most people are biased in that they are intimately familiar with their own lived health problems, so they fill in tons of blanks, discounting the value of inquiry during a consult, whereas doctors may see you for less than a few hours a year, LLMs much less so.
I strongly doubt that the LLM club will remain exclusive for very long, or that the innovation in this space was restricted to 10k people.
At a minimum, I’ve already begun using gpt-4 as a consultant for my fathers medical issues. I can reasonably get confirmation/dis confirmation of whether a medical experts opinion is BS or not. As anyone who has dealt with the medical system in the US can attest - the majority of opinions you get from experts are either BS, outdated, or folks talking their own expertise.
Asking the question to GPT-4 can help you decide when to talk to a different doctor, or try something new entirely.
This adds a whole new dimension to AI safety, it's one thing to dumb it down so it can't do bad stuff, but when you do that you're making it give worse medical advice to people who are going to take that advice.
Apologies, I may misunderstand: there's a lot of Novel All Caps Concepts Even Though Caps Is For Well Worn Cliches. I Think Maybe You Think They're For Accusations? Insults? Big Concepts? For Handwaving At Big Concepts You've Divined Other People Are Thinking?
The last paragraph caught my attention though you were a bit abstract _and_ obtuse, due to the structure being "brief aside for the curious: LLMs don't have bodies"
My job and existence is centered around enabling doctors via LLMs and it absolutely is astounding to and for them. Funnily enough, it's the simplest thing: citations and easy UI to reach them. They perceive it as quick literature review on demand, as far as I can tell, that means they get to skip about 5 minutes across 4-8 articles checking links for relevancy.
I don't think OP was proposing that LLMs will replace doctors as you seem to think. I can't identify anything in their post suggesting that.
I have heard it described as a form of Pascal's wager. If you shout from the rooftops that LLMs are about to spawn a god machine, you get rewarded with attention, and if you're a researcher, job opportunities. There isn't nearly as much room for critics right now.
And if a few years down the line it turns out that you were wrong, everyone else was to, so no big deal.
In fact, you can already see it happening. Scaling up LLMs was surely enough to get to AGI, but now that apparently OpenAI is working on Q*, it's obvious that LLMs alone aren't enough, but LLMs + Q* are!
This is sort of like reading a 5 year old saying hamburgers are supposed to be good but adults are surprising the truth, the top secret new Big Mac sauce is required to make it edible, not to mention a bun.
My GP starts with phone or video consultations 100% of the time. There is no option to see them in person without a referral after a phone or video consult. (I chose them because of the video focus)
Will a good LLM based "consultation" fairly often have to refer you to a face to face consultation? Probably, but of my consultations over the last few years, a significant majority were resolved purely remotely.
While I don't know you personally and I'm not talking about you specifically, "just" feeling very excited about something doesn't Make This About You, the prognostications don't actually help you Be a Part of This.
This is the same energy as being really into COVID-19 (what was it called, "corona-scrolling?"), the gambling-fueled crypto boom, the retail stock trading booms. It's kind of adjacent to the fallacy Feelings that are More Strongly Held Are More Valid.
It's like you could use these things as a barometer for the health of a social media channel.
Anyway, I'm sure there's a name for this part of the hype cycle - tapping into how people want to be a part of the number one biggest, hottest trend by, at the very least, talking about it all the time, trying to compete against each other by sucking the most air out of all rooms through ever-greater hyperbole.
One thing's for sure: there's some guy who found some massive low hanging fruit in some neural network designs by carefully choosing brackets in chained matrix multiplications. That's one guy, and he definitely Made It About Him in a way that makes sense. How many people on Earth have enough knowledge to see things like that, maybe 1,000-10,000? It's so exclusive, in a sense.
I guess my point is, you're pretty far off the mark. In the interest of curiosity: Standard practice in medicine is to examine the patient before giving an opinion, a big roadblock for even the most competent of multi-modal models. Also, most people are biased in that they are intimately familiar with their own lived health problems, so they fill in tons of blanks, discounting the value of inquiry during a consult, whereas doctors may see you for less than a few hours a year, LLMs much less so.