Comment on Meet the AI vegans: They are choosing to abstain from using artificial intelligence for environmental, ethical and personal reasons. Maybe they have a point

• Zacryon@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  But yes. Exactly in the use of “Artificial Intelligence”.

  Artificial Intelligence is a wide field, consisting of a plethora of methods. LLMs like ChatGPT are part of this wide field, as per definition how researchers are describing the field.

  The “intelligence” part is an issue though if taken literal?., since we have no clear definition of what “intelligence” even is. Neither for human / natural intelligence, nor for artificial. But that’s how the field was labled. We have created a category for a bunch of methods, models and algorithms and sticked “AI” onto it. Therefore I stand by what I have said before:

  It is AI.

  Due to the lack of a clear definition for “intelligence” I would coarsely outline AI as: mimicking natural thinking, problem solving and decision processes without necessarily being identical. (This makes it difficult to distinguish it from plain calculators though, so a better definition is required.) So if we have a model that is able to distinguish cat pictures from non-cat pictures, that’s AI. And if we have “autocorrect on steroids” (credit to Dirk Hohndel) like ChatGPT, that matches the text comprehension skills of 15 year olds (just an example), then this too is AI.

  source

  • princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    One fundamental part of “intelligence” is being able to come up with independent thoughts. Another is to be able to think critically about those thoughts. LLMs cannot do either.

    source

    • Zacryon@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Is it though? By which definition?

      What is “thinking critically about thoughts”?
      And what is an “independent thought”? Aren’t our brains not just reacting to sensory inputs and dictated by the way our brains are wired?

      Maybe we should go even further and clarify what a “thought” even is.

      Are animals, who lack the higher cognitive functions, that humans have, therefore not “intelligent”? Are mentally impaired people no longer to be considered “intelligent”? If so, where is the line to be drawn? What are the specific definitions and criteria to correctly distinguish intelligence from non- or pseudo-intelligence?

      source

      • princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I dunno mate, go read the wikipedia article or something.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • mavu@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I was going to wholeheartedly endorse your comment and then you ruin it in the last sentence with

    that matches the text comprehension skills of 15 year olds (just an example), then this too is AI.

    It feels like you know what you are talking about, but then confuse the successful statistical analysis of text as “comprehension” which is just plain factually wrong.

    sad. so close though.

    source

    • Zacryon@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Not my wording, but the one from the paper I have linked.

      source
  • Electricd@lemmybefree.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Enjoy being downvoted for being right

    source

    • Zacryon@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I don’t care about votes. I just hope that people start to comprehend this field a tiny bit better .

      source

      • Electricd@lemmybefree.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        They won’t, because their opinion is political and ideological, not technical

        source