This is not at all what I said. If a machine was complex enough to reason, all power to it. But these LLMs cannot.
Comment on We have to stop ignoring AI’s hallucination problem
EatATaco@lemm.ee 7 months agoThis is circular logic: only humans can be fluent, so the models can’t be fluent because they aren’t human.
And it’s universally upvoted…in response to an ais getting things wrong so they can’t be doing anything but hallucinating.
And will you learn from this? Nope. I’ll just be down voted and shouted at.
snek@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Danksy@lemmy.world 7 months ago
It’s not circular. LLMs cannot be fluent because fluency comes from an understanding of the language. An LLM is incapable of understanding so it is incapable of being fluent. It may be able to mimic it but that is a different thing.
EatATaco@lemm.ee 7 months ago
You might agree with the conclusion, and the conclusion might even be correct, but the poster effectively argued ‘only humans can be fluent, and it’s not a human so it isn’t fluent’ and that is absolutely circular logic.
Danksy@lemmy.world 7 months ago
If we ignore the other poster, do you think the logic in my previous comment is circular?
EatATaco@lemm.ee 7 months ago
Hard to say. You claim they are incapable of understanding, which is why they can’t be fluent. however, really, the whole argument boils down to whether they are capable of understanding. You just state that as if it’s established fact, and I believe that’s an open question at this point.
So whether it is circular depends on why you think they are incapable of understanding. If it’s like the other poster, and it’s because that’s a human(ish) only trait, and they aren’t human…then yes.