Comment on AI-generated code contains more bugs and errors than human output
robobrain@programming.dev 20 hours agoThe Turing test says more about the side administering the test than the side trying to pass it
Just because something can mimic text sufficiently enough to trick someone else doesn’t mean it is capable of anything more than that
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
We can argue about it’s nuances. same with the Chinese room thought experiment.
However, we can’t deny that it the Turing test, is no longer a thought exercise but a real test that can be passed under parameters most people would consider fair.
I thought a computer passing the Turing test would have more fanfare, about the morality if that problem, because the usual conclusion of that thought experiment was “if you cant tell the difference, is there one?”, but now it has become “Shove it everywhere!!!”.
M0oP0o@mander.xyz 19 hours ago
Oh, I just realized that the whole ai bubble is just the whole “everything is a dildo if you are brave enough.”
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
yhea, and “everything is a nail if all you got is a hammer”.
there are some uses for that kind of AI, but very limiting. less robotic voice assisants, content moderation, data analysis, quantification of text. the closest thing to Generative use should be to improve auto complete and spell checking.
M0oP0o@mander.xyz 19 hours ago
I was wondering how they could make autocomplete worse, and now I know.