Why are so many people mad when it’s pointed out that the shitty chatbots are just shitty chatbots.
Comment on ChatGPT "Absolutely Wrecked" at Chess by Atari 2600 Console From 1977
AcesFullOfKings@feddit.uk 5 weeks ago
A7thStone@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
dantheclamman@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I knew there would be these kinds of comments making this obvious point. This is just a demo of how these language models are not going to achieve the “General” part of AGI. It’s going to take a new paradigm
EvilBit@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Now apply this to like, everything else ever.
Machine designed to convincingly fake human internet conversation sucks at ____________!
themeatbridge@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
ChatGPT can’t make a rug as well as a 300 year old loom.
BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Too many people forget that specialized, purpose-driven software is often if more effective and efficient. LLMs and other AI are nice when you don’t have a properly defined spec or a flexible algorithm but you pay, literally, for the convenience.
NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 5 weeks ago
40 year old machine designed to play chess*
TheAgeOfSuperboredom@lemmy.ca 5 weeks ago
Its because of all the people saying that LLMs can reason and think and the human brain works just like an LLM and… some other ridiculous claim.
This shows some limitations on LLMs.
baronvonj@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Human brains lose to computerized chess all the time, though. So I guess this is a win for AI tech bros?
CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
Why the special qualifier of “computerized” chess? Do humans regularly lose to Atari’s at chess? LLMs are computerized too.
propitiouspanda@lemmy.cafe 5 weeks ago
It depends on the human.
I’d wager children would lose quite often.
baronvonj@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I meant a specialized application, like the Atari one that beat the LLM.
REDACTED@infosec.pub 5 weeks ago
But humans not trained (made) for chess would make stupid mistakes too