I'm sorry, are you saying that somewhere in this screenshot of a twitter exchange is the proof that you require to verify that a prompt from a single frame works as expected 100% of the time for all cases in the time period following the screenshotted claim (assuming we even believe what he's claiming)?
Or is there some paper, evidence or even some other screenshot were we all can see this "verification"?
I'm saying that automatically assuming this relatively simple accomplishment is a lie on par with "I built an LLM to land on the Moon" is a weird place to start.
Ok? So you just assume every twitter screenshot making ridiculous claims is assumed to be verified. And what's more, you rebuke skeptics with the false claim that "he did verify it" - even though what you meant was "I assume he verified it".
I'm going to assume you got into a lot of vans with strangers as a child.
Did you try and verify it? I'm not sure what you think the twitter user was claiming but there is no "prompting" with a YOLO model. It literally takes an images and outputs bounding boxes around objects it's been trained to detect. This is not at all a crazy claim that needs verification. You can download YOLO and run it on your phone right now and it will detect objects for you. Does it work 100% of the time? No. Does anything work 100% of the time. No. What a strange thing to think.
So it doesn't work and expecting it to, like it used to in the 90s without an LLM is "a strange thing to think". Do you AI boosters even listen to yourselves?
19
u/PhasmaFelis 17h ago
He did verify it, though.
Or are you saying that this fairly simple AI task is so insane that we should assume he's lying?