I know at least one Ph. D. where this could very well be true.
Ha, I know several.
P. S. About to have a PhD myself
I feel like I’ve been hearing this stupid “PhD level intelligence” claim about every LLM that’s come out since ChatGPT was first released, including GPT-3.0 which it launched with. It kind of amazes me that people keep falling for it and not questioning how the new model having “PhD level intelligence” is both a true claim and also noteworthy when the claim is made about every new model.
Iv met enough phd holders to know that they can and frequently are still unabashedly wrong on the vast majority of everything they talk about that isn’t hyper specific to a narrow and niche topic.
So phd level intelligence to me just means it’s more prone to the being confidently wrong and judgemental.
sometimes they are outdated if they have been doing projects or research for a while too.
It will analyze and parse primary sources with all the discernment of a pure math PhD! Design bridges with all the insight of a literature PhD! Diagnose medical problems with all the experience of a supreme court justice!
Sam Altman wants to raise babies using AI.
Never forget.
Literally the plot of a Neal Stephenson novel.
And the point was you still needed a fucking parent to turn out sane.
GPT5 was an effort by OpenAI to reduce costs. It is not smarter than the latest GPT4 models.
Because they are unable to make it smarter
If they could have made it smarter they would have
There are models smarter than GPT5.
Why is that image giving the same vibes as:
deleted by creator
Disney contract.
just looks like a fusion of these 2(scarlet witch)
Based on the fact that they’d give someone like me a PhD, this comes as no surprise. But it’s not saying as much about GPT-5 as a lot of people might think.
does that mean it’s also going to have PhD-level depression?
I know a dude with a PhD in Computer Science who’s far-right and his sister is a psychiatrist who thinks conversion therapy works lol lmao
This just shows that there is no correlation between beliefs and intelligence. The knowledge you obtain gets applied on top of your belief system, often times doesn’t change your beliefs. I have a couple of doctor friends and I wouldn’t go to 1 of them if my life depended on it. She graduated from a Caribbean med school and is your typical maga.
many doctors are just really good at regurgitating information they gathered in their 20’s, they’re not particularly inspired in their field of study or stay up-to-date on all the latest information. they just got into the work because it appeared to be a stable well-paying job, simple as
then are entire fields compromised by $ and short-sightedness, like podetry. modern feet have so many problems because modern shoes are just…terrible, but podiatrists make a bunch of $ peddling “arch support”, special shoes/inserts etc.
the foot-arch comes from a muscle, muscles atrophy when you when support them…all you need to do to get arches back is wear flat-soled shoes (this hurts, if you’ve not worn them…ever, as those muscles have barely been used)
Also it is a reminder that an expert in something is not generally an expert in anything else, and anything they’re not expert in they’re only as good at it as the average person of the same intelligence and education
And let’s not forget the avg person is dumb as rocks. All of us included.
“Intelligence” is such a dumb word.
What’s intelligent about getting deep into debt and using up years of your life to get into niche work you can only do in a handful of locations, if you’re lucky?
Sometimes we don’t value stable career or steady income as highly as other pursuits.
I wouldn’t say it’s not intelligent. Just different priorities.
I admire anyone brave and idealistic enough to commit to academia or culture or any similarly less lucrative and extremely uncertain path. Takes some resilience and big balls. You are almost guaranteed to lose a lot of the comforts available to others with that. And yet, they still do it. And we are all better for it. The world is better for it.
What you described pretty much fits the very definition of dumb. Bravery very frequently is the exact opposite of intelligence.
That’s why you should never tell anyone the odds cuz then they might not be brave enough to take the risk.
If they know the odds and do it anyways then they’re dumb. But also fucking hats off to him. Their balls are the size of Saturn. And that deserves respect
While I don’t agree, I’ll concede I might be in the minority with this stand. But I don’t really believe in a universal intelligence in the first place. There are several, and not all of them are self-serving or marked by the traditionally associated emotionless calculations. There’s emotional intelligence. Social intelligence. And so on.
I don’t pretend to be a philosopher or a psychologist to say what they all are, what they even are if you get down to it, but I do know there’s intelligence in caring for others. There’s intelligence in many kinds of sacrifice too. They just aren’t the classical kind of universal intelligence, because that is defined by self-serving “cold facts” and a fragile attempt at realizing an objective world and objective stance on it, which one can never truly reach or possess. If something like that even is possible.
I stand by my original comment, and I’ll be a bit sad to learn if I’m the odd one out with that take, but I also think these are the kind of things philosophers ought to talk about and not me. What do I know? Maybe my view is distorted by idealism and good expectations, faith in people and the world, that may well be unsubstantiated and entirely delusional.
You’ve basically just re-defined intelligence as selfishness.
depends on the field, Most people earning a phd can at least find a job eventhough it might not be the one you want. cant say the same for a BS, MS holders they have a much harder time, because employers are cheapskate.
Dartmouth has a PhD in Dumbassery?
Have you ever seen the degrees in professor’s office? None of them are level
Sounds like I’ve heard that before :)
So autistic level?
Autistic here, I do not consider the Markov-chain machine to be one of us.
Am I supposed to be impressed? I have a PhD level intelligence and I am not exactly impressive.
LMAO right.
This PhD = Genius trope needs to end.
How much of that is the fault of colleges? All that shit about requiring science majors to take liberal arts classes or art majors taking calculus to make them “well rounded.” A bachelor’s degree is supposed to be a mark that you’re just all around better educated than someone with a mere high school diploma, to the point that “It doesn’t matter what you major in, just get a degree” is somehow valid advice. But a doctorate is awarded for a significant work of original research; a Ph. D. means you’re the world’s foremost expert in some tiny corner of a sub-discipline, kind of the opposite of being “well rounded.”
But even then, knowledge ≠ intelligence.
And there are plenty of fields that get it completely wrong.
You could argue the majority of economics PhD’s get so stuck into the dominant model they might be less intelligent w.r.t. actual resource distribution than an amateur.
Right? I know more shit than some people on some topics…and less shit than other people on other topics.
Expertise might be what they were going for…but they can’t say that because AI can’t have expertise on anything.
Expertise is about knowing what you don’t know, just as much about what you know. The terms like “PhD level intelligence” are meant to mislead people. LLMs cannot understand simply because they are just statistical parrots. Only fools blindly trust output of LLMs.
There’s a lot of a disagreement to be had here…but AI is a topic where we all pretty much seem to agree.
I’ve experimented with AI (so-called chatbots) and the best that can be said about it is it’s a tool…not even a good tool…for starting a project when you’re stuck. It’s absolutely unreliable for anything approaching a final project. I guess…it’s really great if you enjoy being pissed off that it can both mine valid obscure information, while at the same time lie to your face over and over…but then do a 180 on something that’s true or a lie just because you tell it to.
The only value I got out of AI was it made me laugh out loud once…genuinely. I realized it had created this entire fake universe when it was supposed to be researching something real…and like a crazy person I was scolding it…when it was apologing it told me “I’m sorry…I understand that I’m a bit like a toaster that was advertised as a chef…but really all I do is try to burn your house down”. I thought it was hilarious and appropriate.
I understand that I’m a bit like a toaster that was advertised as a chef…but really all I do is try to burn your house down
This is a beautiful metaphor and I’m pissed that it came out of an LLM. Either this is a hilarious consequence of the word “toaster” often being followed by “burn your house”, or someone else on the Internet came up with it and the LLM just regurgitated.
I mean…I’m sure it came from something I said to it…all LLMs are good for is being agreeable and reflecting what you want back to you…provided what you ask for is simple.
You missed what they meant. It means gpt5 is really good at one arbitrary and extremely specific topic. Anything else it’s comparable with a random person on the street.
Anything else it’s comparable with a random person on the street.
I’d say we’re actually worse than the average person at everything else. Too much of our brain is allocated to our research.
It does seem like there’s an inverse correlation of general intelligence/common sense and specialized study.
Reality is the opposite though. GPT5 is expert in a pretty wide amount of trivia. It’s better than the average uneducated person in every subject, but worse than an expert in every subject.
And the average person has (usually) no idea if what they’re being fed is even correct. But as long as it sounds correct to someone who has no idea…
Plausible bullshit machines.
That’s my favorite Nine Inch Nails album!
All the AI are wrong at least 1 in 20 tokens, probably more like 3 in 20, to their sample data which is also wrong a considerable amount of the time, so it is an expert in literally nothing and never will be.
That 1 in 20 number comes from the 2020 paper by OpenAI and the 2022 paper correcting it by Deepmind about AI scaling laws where the AI inverse error rate would never reach 94% with infnite training and power.
deleted by creator
GIGO
It can also have good in and garbage out, as I mentioned it will never achieve human input accuracy much less superhuman input.
I still count and do math with my fingers and still fuck it up. I guess they’re just like us. 🥲
I would like to see you count 1.33 + 3.25 on your fingers. 🙂
Hold my beer while I sum up each decimal placement and carry the number over.
Nah, it’ll be more impressive if you do it while holding your beer.
I need full access to my piggies. :(
I do that and I have a BS in mathematics. and in 4th grade I literally used to write “I hate math” at the top of my math homework. as much as primary education systems want it to be, computation speed is not mathematical aptitude. you can memorize multiplication tables up to 20, that’s not gonna help you understand Cantor’s theorem
At one point I had an audio book version of Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman. One of Richard Feynman’s memoirs, he avoids talking about his work for the most part and tells stories in oddly low-level English about the shenanigans he’d get up to in his off hours. The entire book sounds something like this:
“One day I decided to go for a walk. I passed a bar. There was music playing in the bar, and people were dancing. It sounded great. I went inside to look at the girls. Their dancing looked great. I noticed one of the musicians was playing a little drum. I asked if I could try. He let me try the drum. It made a really interesting sound.”
At one point, he was in a bar, and was approached by an abacus salesman, who challenged him to a math race. The abacus easily bested Feynman’s mental math in addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, managed to outpace him in exponents and logarithms, and then it just so happened that as the math problems got harder, it just so happened that Feynman had the answers to the exact problems asked memorized, so it appeared he did them instantly in his head. Like by coincidence they asked the exact problem he’d spent the previous week calculating.
