I wish I could find the article. It was researchers and they were freaked out just as much as anyone else. It’s like slightly over chance that it “thought,” not some huge revolutionary leap.
anything that claims it “thinks” on any way I immediately dismiss as an advertisement of some sort. these models are doing very interesting things, but it is in no way “thinking” as a sentient mind does.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
FunnyUsername@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
there has been a flooding of these articles. everyone wants to sell their llm as “the smartest one closest to a real human” even though the entire concept of calling them AI is a marketing misnomer
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
Maybe? Didn’t seem like a sales job at the time, more like a warning. You could be right though.
TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
they post articles like that all the time. warnings make great clickbait
stephen01king@lemmy.zip 4 weeks ago
Anybody who claims they don’t “think” before we even figure out completely how they work and even how human thoughts work are just spreading anti-AI sentiment beyond what is considered logical.
You should become a better example than an AI by only arguing based on facts rather than things you hallucinate if you want to prove your own position on this matter.
TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
shouldn’t you say the inverse is true lol why call it thinking if we don’t know what thinking is or what it’s doing?
why are you cool with pro ai and against anti ai sentiments? either way it’s a value judgment, quit acting like yours is the correct opinion
stephen01king@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
I wasn’t calling it thinking. I’m saying people claiming it’s not is just jumping the gun. It’s also funny you’re simply claiming I am pro AI without needing any proof. This is what I meant when I said people who are anti-AI should strive to be better than the AI they criticise. Acting based on non-facts makes you no better than AI with their hallucinations.
Its also funny that you’re calling me out when I’m just mirroring what the other guy is doing to make a point. He’s acting like his is the correct opinion, yet you only calling me out because the guy is on your side of the argument. That’s simply a bad faith argument on your part.
TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
I see the misunderstanding, sorry. You’re still in the wrong though. while you weren’t calling it thinking, the article certainly was. THAT’S why we’re saying it’s not. we’re doing what you said we should, but it’s the inverse, and you call it anti-AI. the jackass who wrote that article is jumping the gun and we’re saying “how tf can you call it thinking” and i see your reply calling that anti AI, seems like a reasonable mistake ye?
LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
You know they don’t think - even though “It’s a peculiar truth that we don’t understand how large language models (LLMs) actually work.”?
It’s truly shocking to read this from a mess of connected neurons and synapses like yourself. You’re simply doing fancy word prediction of the next word /s