Comment on There is no such thing as an effective "AI detector", nor will there ever be one.

• SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It’s not an AGI, but it’s still AI

  source
• deong@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  There’s no real distinction between the two. We don’t have a definition of AI or intelligence — never have. Inside the field, ML has some recognized connotations, but outside of specialist literature, they’re just marketing fluff.

  source
• Zeppo@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It’s interesting that it started a conversation about “if this thing can make output exactly like a human, does it matter?” but I agree… it’s not conscious or ‘thinking’ about what it says. The output sure can be convincing, though.

  source

  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I think a huge way that it matters is that it doesn’t ask questions.

    source

    • Zeppo@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      That’s a very good point. Even Eliza asked questions (and the last thing we need now is a ChatGPT therapist mode). It’s also a matter of what it’s programmed to do, but I don’t believe that the system has awareness or curiosity.

      source
• Crackhappy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  There is a fundamental difference between recombinant regurgitation and creation.

  source