I don’t want to get into an argument of semantics, whatever your definition of ‘knowledge’ is, LLMs can recall a greater number of factoids than any individual human. That’s all I meant. Are they perfect? No, I never said that. They’re still far beyond the average human, however, hence superhuman.
I said that LLMs are not an existential threat to humanity, even economically. I never said that they wouldn’t threaten individual jobs, or cause a bubble. Please don’t strawman me. You and I are looking at completely different levels of effects, I’m looking at the big picture - is humanity or society as we know it going to continue to exist in 100 years (in this hypothetical where AI and/or LLMs stagnated)? If yes, then LLMs are not an existential threat. That’s what an existential threat means, after all.
Is AI causing en economic bubble? Sure, but like all bubbles they will burst when people realise that they have limited use due to their drawbacks. The world will then return to some semblance of normalcy. That’s a non-existential threat.
Now, if we’re talking about a world in which AI systems continue to evolve? All bets are off the table.
MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 days ago
You’re still doing it. “recalling factoids” is not how they work. At all.
Me saying you’re wrong about them being an economic threat isn’t a strawman. It’s me disagreeing about the severity of the issue. You having an ignorant opinion is not me strawmanning you. It’s me calling you ignorant.
Rossphorus@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Fine, you want me to be pedantic? When prompted with tokens that appear in an order that humans understand as a question that corresponds to some aspect of the universe as we understand it, the tokens predicted by the LLM correspond to an answer that humans agree is more representative than the tokens provided by the average human. Tell me where in my initial comment I said they weren’t an economic threat. I never said they weren’t. I said they aren’t an existential threat. Please read my comment.
MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 days ago
And I disagree about them being existential threats to many, and to the whole current layout of the economy. It’s not designed to perform well for everyone with high unemployment rates in the first place, let alone in the Gilded Age 2.0.
Rossphorus@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Don’t forget this is all under the umbrella of the initial hypothetical where AI stalled at it’s current level. I don’t believe that existing LLMs systems will destroy the economy. They’re a tool that people are trying to fit into every hole, much like blockchain during the crypto bubble. We’ve already seen companies fire their customer service departments, try to replace them with LLMs, then have to go crawling back when that failed catastrophically.
If AI systems continue to improve, however? As I said previously, all bets are off.