Comment on vines of the animal kingdom

• ilost7489@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Ai does not think. It predicts what word sounds right based on what we humans have written. It cannot make up thoughts or original concepts, synthesize info, etc. Being able to string sentences together based on probability is not necessarily intelligence or consciousness

  source
• Bezier@suppo.fi ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Neither. Why are those the only two options? My answer is that I have spent a little bit of time looking into how these things actually work. It’s surface level only, but it should be enough. Are you one of those crazy people who thinks chatgpt is sentient?

  I’m not saying that a “real” AI cannot be built ever, but I for sure am saying that these image generators and chatbots are not it. AI tools are just functions that have no thought. If they start building products with some kind of continuous brain simulations, I’ll seriously rethink my stance.

  source

  • dragonfucker@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Those are the only two options because you chose to argue with drag’s point about generative AI being smarter than a worm. You took this bait willingly. You devoted yourself to trying to prove a worm is smarter than ChatGPT. Nobody asked you to do it, you just decided this was what you were going to do today. It’s weird, why would you do that?

    source

    • homicidalrobot@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Nobody devoted themselves to shit, you’ve interjected with actual insane person comments about the topic. The AI isn’t alive and doesn’t even resemble life. You do not understand generative AI on a basic level. You do not understand how responses are generated or what’s going on with a prompt and response.

      You need help. Not from me, not from social media. Try a social worker. Magical thinking like this points to some pretty unfortunate problems for you on a personal level, and it would behoove you and relieve everyone you know to get it figured out.

      source
    • Apollo42@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      "Its weird, why would you do that?"

      • some guy who talks about himself in the 3rd person

      source
    • Bezier@suppo.fi ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I have no clue what you’re trying to prove, but I think I’m done with this conversation.

      source
• VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Neither the worm, nor current LLMs, are sapient.

  Also, I don’t really like most corporate LLM projects, but not because they enslave the LLMs. An LLMs ‘thought process’ doesn’t really happen while it isn’t being used, and only encompasses a relatively small context window. How could something that isn’t capable of existing outside it’s ‘enslavement’ be freed?

  source

  • dragonfucker@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    The sweet release of death.

    Or, you know, we could devote serious resources to studying the nature of consciousness instead of just pretending like we already have all the answers, and we could use this knowledge to figure out how to treat AI ethically.

    Utilitarians believe ethics means increasing happiness. What if we could build AI farms with trillions of simulants doing heroin all the time with no ill effects?

    source

    • Irelephant@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      We are devoting serious resources to studying the nature of consicousness.

      source
    • VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      End commercial usage of LLMs? Honestly, I’m fine with that, why not. Don’t have to agree on the reason.

      I am not saying understanding the nature of consciousness better wouldn’t be great, but there’s so much research thsg deserves much more funding, and that isn’t really a LLM problem, but a systemic problem. And I just haven’t seen any convincing evidence current Models are conscious.

      I feel like the last part is something the AI from the paperclip thought experiment would do.

      source