Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Eugen Rochko (gargron@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 16:14:43 JST Eugen Rochko

   • かき@GNUsocialJP

   It’s hard not to say “AI” when everybody else does too, but technically calling it AI is buying into the marketing. There is no intelligence there, and it’s not going to become sentient. It’s just statistics, and the danger they pose is primarily through the false sense of skill or fitness for purpose that people ascribe to them.

   • Embed this notice
     Merijn 👨‍💻:mastodon: (mrbellek@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 16:17:46 JST Merijn 👨‍💻:mastodon:

     in reply to

     @Gargron agreed. It's just LLMs, the professional nonsense generators

   • Embed this notice
     Sibrosan (sibrosan@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 16:28:05 JST Sibrosan

     in reply to

     @Gargron

     Maybe it should be consistently written as "AI" instead of as AI.

   • Embed this notice
     Still Andy Really (squirlykat@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 16:35:00 JST Still Andy Really

     in reply to

     @Gargron and sadly nobody will become more intelligent by using it

   • Embed this notice
     Dmitry Borodaenko (angdraug@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 16:39:21 JST Dmitry Borodaenko

     in reply to

     @Gargron This false sense of skill or fitness for purposs comes from its incomprehensibility. Not because it's complex, although it is that, too. More because it is not designed to be comprehended. Only to be consumed.

     The danger of AI is not in that it's not intelligent, it is in that it's unintelligible.

   • Embed this notice
     Thomas Ricouard (dimillian@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 16:41:23 JST Thomas Ricouard

     in reply to

     @Gargron Then we can agree that at this stage AI safety is another trick of marketing.

   • Embed this notice
     Ilgaz Öcal (ilgaz@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 16:44:53 JST Ilgaz Öcal

     in reply to

     @Gargron As usual, rms is telling the truth and nobody listens ;-)

     "I can't foretell the future, but it is important to realize that ChatGPT is not artificial intelligence. It has no intelligence; it doesn't know anything and doesn't understand anything. It plays games with words to make plausible-sounding English text, but any statements made in it are liable to be false. It can't avoid that because it doesn't know what the words _mean_."

   • Embed this notice
     Kathy E. Gill 🇺🇦 (kegill@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 17:04:01 JST Kathy E. Gill 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Prof. Emily M. Bender(she/her)

     @Gargron
     I have been calling it an algorithmic tool. I like @emilymbender suggestion to reference it as automation.

     #AI

   • Embed this notice
     Healthcarer (healthcarer@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 17:16:32 JST Healthcarer

     in reply to

     @Gargron Whatever intelligence is. Advanced statistics?

   • Embed this notice
     Duncan Stephen (duncanstephen@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 17:23:01 JST Duncan Stephen

     in reply to

     @Gargron The people using the phrase "AI" to describe their weak products are the same people who used the word "algorithm" for everything ten years ago.

   • Embed this notice
     MegatronicThronBanks (megatronicthronbanks@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 17:49:36 JST MegatronicThronBanks

     in reply to

     @Gargron It's a hybrid of Symbolic AI and Neural Networks, which is where this was always going. This current weak adaptation is already destroying egos left right and centre, and it's going to improve. More feedback. Deeper abstraction. Inference.

   • Embed this notice
     Zoe Hendrickse (huffles@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 18:12:44 JST Zoe Hendrickse

     in reply to

     @Gargron yeah. The true test for AI I believe is when they’re able to self learn and improve. So recessions of generations without human input can result in them being “better”.
     So far all the “AI” systems being pushed are known to become worse if fed their own output.

   • Embed this notice
     VoquiLeibbrandt pas un pseudo (voquileibbrandt@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 18:13:02 JST VoquiLeibbrandt pas un pseudo

     in reply to

     @Gargron By now I dream of AI under the influence it may make it more human.. though I am not under influence by myself :)

   • Embed this notice
     Helles Sachsen (helles_sachsen@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 18:14:23 JST Helles Sachsen

     in reply to

     @Gargron
     There is no common accepted definition of intelligence with which you can prove that a human around you is really intelligent and not just acting like?

   • Embed this notice
     Sumukha S (halfbloodprice@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 18:16:35 JST Sumukha S

     in reply to

     @Gargron True. There is no original intelligence but data processed and delivered as information with a really good packaging.

   • Embed this notice
     Darren Moffat (darrenmoffat@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 18:27:00 JST Darren Moffat

     in reply to

     @Gargron I prefer expanding AI as Adaptive Inference

   • Embed this notice
     gmsizemore (gmsizemore@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 19:47:36 JST gmsizemore

     in reply to

     @Gargron And let me guess...your definition of "intelligence" specifically excludes what people are calling AI. But here's the thing...there is nothing called "intelligence." Find out what the independent-variables are that are relevant to the behavior we _call_ "intelligent" - even in nonhumans. And, actually, after the era of GOFAI ended, they did...sort of. AI people have ignored the natural science of behavior and it has hurt their efforts for AGI. Think "conditioning," people. Sheesh!

   • Embed this notice
     pc_roto (la_plaga@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 19:49:27 JST pc_roto

     in reply to

     @Gargron i have been long thinking about this. Isn't our own brain electric pulses? Web are social animals, we learn imitating others, so, what is intelligence? Not trolling, i'd like to read you

   • Embed this notice
     crazy janey (hazydavy@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 20:12:47 JST crazy janey

     in reply to

     @Gargron
     true
     +an unlimited computing capacity

   • Embed this notice
     Felix (felixcorreia@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 20:13:31 JST Felix

     in reply to

     @Gargron

   • Embed this notice
     Chrisi79 (based79@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 21:12:18 JST Chrisi79

     in reply to

     @Gargron Those systems behave intelligently even if they are not. They understand complex questions and complex code for example. Even if it is all statistics at end, the results are breathtaking. #AI #ChatGPT #OpenAI

   • Embed this notice
     glelkaitis (glelkaitis@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 21:20:41 JST glelkaitis

     in reply to

     @Gargron "AI" is a testament to how we give the different meaning to the word as we see fit or fancy. Which "AI" is incapable of.

   • Embed this notice
     airjunglist (airjunglist@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 21:26:30 JST airjunglist

     in reply to

     @Gargron this.

   • Embed this notice
     rticks (rticks@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 21:49:38 JST rticks

     in reply to

     @Gargron

     I call them LLMs

     I call general intelligences to be Digital Intelligence because when eventually real they wont be Artificial

   • Embed this notice
     SmokeCrack.lol (smokecrackerc@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 22:30:16 JST SmokeCrack.lol

     in reply to

     @Gargron It's tempting to call it AI, but I'd rather refer to it as 'sophisticated pattern recognition software.' Ultimately it's just a fancy algorithm, or a glorified data matcher.

   • Embed this notice
     Whyfullyblind (elizaalex@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 22:37:38 JST Whyfullyblind

     in reply to

     @Gargron what i dont get is the implicit bias they build in the machine decision making that they don’t even see. Its bizarre and dangerous. Hubris.

   • Embed this notice
     Preslav Rachev (preslavrachev@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 10-Dec-2023 22:54:51 JST Preslav Rachev

     in reply to

     @Gargron wrote about that a few months ago: https://preslav.me/2023/05/22/i-believe-in-machine-learning-dont-believe-in-artificial-intelligence/

     The best we get to call it is Augmented (Human) Intelligence. Like those glasses that overlay things in front of your eyes, current AI is mostly a tool that does stuff for you, and it just happens to do it better than tools before it. New types of problems bring in new tools to solve them. But it’s just brute-forcing an answer in the end, I agree.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 00:21:34 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     @Gargron come now! This overstates our current knowledge of the nature of intelligence. LLMs are adaptive, they have memory, they use language to communicate, and they integrate disparate experiences to solve problems. They have many of the hallmarks of what we call intelligence. They have more such characteristics than, say, dolphins or chimps. Us knowing how they work is not a disqualifier for them being intelligent.

   • Embed this notice
     Kevin Jardine (kevinjardine@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 00:40:02 JST Kevin Jardine

     in reply to

     @Gargron LLMs are more sophisticated versions of the old ELIZA chatbot. At least ELIZA's creator Joseph Weizenbaum did not attempt to overhype what it was.

     https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 00:46:41 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     @Gargron I liked the article "Sparks of AGI" which does systematic comparisons of intelligence metrics on GPT-4. There are also plenty of critiques worth reading.

     https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

   • Embed this notice
     Javier Paredes (javier_paredes@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 00:47:45 JST Javier Paredes

     in reply to

     @Gargron
     Large Language Models are to intelligence what elevators are to teleportation.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 00:59:29 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Kevin Marks

     @KevinMarks @Gargron can you summarize?

   • Embed this notice
     Kevin Marks (kevinmarks@xoxo.zone)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 00:59:30 JST Kevin Marks

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @Gargron there are very specific critiques of that article. https://peertube.dair-institute.org/w/gn7Lycfbm684NEi7xok2gf

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:06:26 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Kevin Marks

     @KevinMarks @Gargron yeah, I'm not going to do that. Send me some written critiques though!

   • Embed this notice
     Kevin Marks (kevinmarks@xoxo.zone)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:06:27 JST Kevin Marks

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @Gargron that paper cites a definition of intelligence by racist eugenicists, and doesn't have any actual controls, only vibes. It is worth watching / listening, as is the linked radiolab series on intelligence measuring

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:07:37 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Neo-Rodneyite ✍🏿📖
     • Kevin Marks

     @jalcine @KevinMarks @Gargron which citations?

   • Embed this notice
     Neo-Rodneyite ✍🏿📖 (jalcine@todon.eu)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:07:39 JST Neo-Rodneyite ✍🏿📖

     in reply to

     • Kevin Marks
     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @KevinMarks @Gargron check the citations of that paper would be the most immediate one

   • Embed this notice
     Marcus Adams (gerowen@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:10:41 JST Marcus Adams

     in reply to

     @Gargron I've been telling people this forever and they don't want to hear it. They're so enamored with the science fiction of "AI" that they don't understand companies will lie for money.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:10:53 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Neo-Rodneyite ✍🏿📖
     • Kevin Marks

     @jalcine @KevinMarks @Gargron what do they say?

   • Embed this notice
     Neo-Rodneyite ✍🏿📖 (jalcine@todon.eu)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:10:55 JST Neo-Rodneyite ✍🏿📖

     in reply to

     • Kevin Marks
     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @KevinMarks @Gargron to the paper you've referenced!

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:19:15 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Neo-Rodneyite ✍🏿📖
     • Kevin Marks

     @jalcine @KevinMarks @Gargron I see a lot of discussion of the Gottfredson definition of intelligence, which was removed. I've only read parts of the most recent version, which says "there's no generally agreed definition of intelligence." Which I think is still true, although I am not an expert in this field.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:22:02 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Kevin Marks

     @KevinMarks @Gargron I deleted my recommendation of this paper.

   • Embed this notice
     Kevin Marks (kevinmarks@xoxo.zone)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:22:03 JST Kevin Marks

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @Gargron https://medium.com/@emilymenonbender/talking-about-a-schism-is-ahistorical-3c454a77220f

   • Embed this notice
     King of Red Lions (kingofredlions@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:22:08 JST King of Red Lions

     in reply to

     @Gargron
     Are you saying the "revolutionary artificial intelligence technology" in this toothbrush is just marketing? That there isn't an Nvidia GPU inside analyzing my teeth in realtime? https://oralb.com/en-us/products/electric-toothbrushes/genius-x-limited-electronic-toothbrush-white/

   • Embed this notice
     Matt Hodges (matthodges@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:29:38 JST Matt Hodges

     in reply to

     @evan @Gargron Not too long ago — in fact, roughly a year or two ago — "Artificial Intelligence" was a term used to describe computer systems which could perform tasks that historically required human cognition. Few people were offended that Chess or Go-playing systems were considered "AI" and "real intelligence" was never a requirement. But, as we see time and time again, "AI is whatever hasn't been done yet."

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect

   • Embed this notice
     Matt Hodges (matthodges@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:30:42 JST Matt Hodges

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @Gargron I think it's historically incorrect to say that, "technically calling it AI is buying into the marketing". Yes, marketing is capitalizing on it! But the nomenclature matches my CS education from the late 2000s and it matches 70 years of how "AI" is used in research and literature. The recent obsession with asserting "theory of mind" or "intentions" or "originality" or "real intelligence" seems, well, recent.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:30:42 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Matt Hodges

     @MattHodges @Gargron I think there are a lot of things GPT4 is bad at. It's not very good at simple arithmetic. It is bad at geographical information -- what places are near others, parts of each other. It also does a bad job at string manipulation -- words that start with a particular letter, or words that are anagrams of other words. I don't think you have to resort to mysticism to say why it is not yet human-equivalent. But that doesn't mean it's not intelligent.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:31:25 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Bike Shed

     @bikeshed I don't think that there's a ranking of intelligence on a single scale. But LLMs are better at, say, language use than chimps are.

   • Embed this notice
     Bike Shed (bikeshed@503junk.house)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:31:26 JST Bike Shed

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan ranking LLMs over dolphins or chimps for "intelligence" is pure anthropocentrism.

   • Embed this notice
     Ampelios (pelielios@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:56:04 JST Ampelios

     in reply to

     @Gargron Yes. Anyone who has ever complained about autocorrect should know better than to think "AI" is anything but more of the same.

   • Embed this notice
     Joseph Szymborski :qcca: (jszym@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 01:58:11 JST Joseph Szymborski :qcca:

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @Gargron I'd have to disagree. LLMs are primarily used for two things, parsing text, and generating text.

     The parsing functions of LLMs are truly incredible, an represent (IMHO) a generational shift in tech. But the world's best regex isn't intelligence in my book, even if it parses semantically.

     [1/2]

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:14:37 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Joseph Szymborski :qcca:

     @jszym @Gargron what does it mean to "know" something?

   • Embed this notice
     Joseph Szymborski :qcca: (jszym@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:14:38 JST Joseph Szymborski :qcca:

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @Gargron Ok, ok, one parting thought:

     I'll just add that having memory, being adaptive, and using language to communicate are all things that computer programmes that don't use LLMs do today.

     LLMs are (IMHO) the most convincing mimics we've ever created by many orders of magnitude. But they don't actually *know* anything.

     I can't wait for the world to see what truly *useful* things LLMs can do other than be sometimes right on logic puzzles and write bad poetry.

   • Embed this notice
     Joseph Szymborski :qcca: (jszym@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:14:39 JST Joseph Szymborski :qcca:

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @Gargron The generating functions of LLMs are (again, IMHO) both the most hyped and least useful function of LLMs.

     While LLMs generate text that is coherent, that can illicit emotion or thought or any number of things, we're mostly looking into a mirror. LLMs don't "integrate" knowledge, they're just really, really, really big Markov chains.

     Don't get me wrong, "intelligent" systems most certainly will use an LLM, but generating text from prompts the way we do isn't intelligence.

     [2/2]

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:23:23 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Fifi Lamoura

     @fifilamoura @Gargron thanks, and that's a fair point. I'd say LLMs are better at other intelligence metrics, like language use.

   • Embed this notice
     Fifi Lamoura (fifilamoura@eldritch.cafe)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:23:25 JST Fifi Lamoura

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan Hey, you may be unaware of the actual problem solving, social lives and intelligence of dolphins, they're far more adaptive to reality than an LLM is. And LLMs don't have experiences, that's projecting human sensory capabilities onto them they simply don't have since they're not embodied (experiences are far more than memories and they don't just live in narratives/texts/memories....see current research into PTSD and memory, for instance). @Gargron

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:24:27 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Matt Hodges

     @MattHodges fair enough!

   • Embed this notice
     Matt Hodges (matthodges@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:24:28 JST Matt Hodges

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan

     Yes, and...!

     > It's not very good at simple arithmetic.

     This is a recurrent example that is starting to illustrate the difference between bare LLMs and the products built on top of them. Eg, ChatGPT is a product built on top of a system. That system has a lot of components. One of those components is a LLM. And another component is a Python interpreter. LLMs can write Python quite well, and Python can do math quite well.

     Seems like a pretty intelligent system to me!

   • Embed this notice
     Joseph Szymborski :qcca: (jszym@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:28:11 JST Joseph Szymborski :qcca:

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @Gargron Ya, I think that's the heart of the question :)

     What I'm trying to communicate is that when I ask an LLM "what is on the inside of an orange", the programme isn't consulting some representation of the concept of "orange (fruit)". Rather, it's looking at all the likely words that would follow your prompt.

     If you get a hallucination form that prompt, we think it made an error, but really the LLM is doing it's job, just plausible words. My bar for intelligence is personally higher

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:53:54 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Bike Shed

     @bikeshed I am not! I think you should go back and reread my post with fresh eyes. I said that LLMs do better on some of the measures of intelligence than chimps and dolphins. I didn't say that they are more intelligent than those animals, nor did I say that the measures of intelligence they excel at are more important than the intelligence necessary to survive in the world.

   • Embed this notice
     Bike Shed (bikeshed@503junk.house)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:53:57 JST Bike Shed

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan but again, this is anthropocentric. You're defining language as language that is intelligible to humans and then saying that the tool designed by humans to output human language is better at human language than chimps! It's a silly game that plays into this very stratified view of what constitutes intelligence.

     I certainly think that ranking LLMs over dolphins, who we have little understanding of their communication, seems very bizarre.

   • Embed this notice
     Bike Shed (bikeshed@503junk.house)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:53:57 JST Bike Shed

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan additionally, why is language use a more defining characteristic of intelligence than tool use? Chimps, bonobos, dolphins, octopi, corvids etc all can use tools and solve complex tasks but aren't good at language (to our definition of language). Does this matter?

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 02:55:22 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Joseph Szymborski :qcca:

     @jszym @Gargron the words are a representation.

   • Embed this notice
     N0rman (n0rman@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 03:02:44 JST N0rman

     in reply to

     @Gargron GIGO. It's all about the training.

   • Embed this notice
     Adlangx (lightninhopkins@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 03:58:15 JST Adlangx

     in reply to

     @Gargron Plagiarism machine works.

   • Embed this notice
     Pine (pinecone@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 04:35:12 JST Pine

     in reply to

     @Gargron Oh, the irony. Aren't you just parroting Emily Bender? A chatbot could have said this. How can we know that what you say is more than just your cognitive statistics?

     1. There is intelligence in current LLM based AI. A different sort, but still intelligence. Language competence without comprehension.

     2. Most of what people say is pretty much at the level of parroting.

     3. What you say is half true, half misleading.

     Several people on this thread have mentioned this sort of idea.

   • Embed this notice
     Son of a Sailor (sonofasailor@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 04:41:07 JST Son of a Sailor

     in reply to

     @Gargron I wish these bots would stop being personified. Statistical databases don't have personalities.

   • Embed this notice
     cultdev (cultdev@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 05:51:53 JST cultdev

     in reply to

     @Gargron probably the single keenest and clearest articulation of this point that i’ve seen yet. no wonder you’re the mastodon guy

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 06:22:54 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Bike Shed

     @bikeshed I will revise to be clearer.

   • Embed this notice
     Bike Shed (bikeshed@503junk.house)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 06:22:55 JST Bike Shed

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan agree to disagree, but I struggle to read "They have many of the hallmarks of what we call intelligence. They have more such characteristics than, say, dolphins or chimps" in another way than a kind of ranking.

   • Embed this notice
     David W. Jones (dancingtreefrog@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 07:37:37 JST David W. Jones

     in reply to

     • Ether Diver

     @Gargron
     I always read "AI" in the news as "Artificial Idiocy." Although the terms "Augmented Idiocy" or "Amplified Idiocy" just came to mind.
     @etherdiver

   • Embed this notice
     Terci (terci@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 08:01:55 JST Terci

     in reply to

     @Gargron aptly put

   • Embed this notice
     RustyBertrand (rustybertrand@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 08:23:43 JST RustyBertrand

     in reply to

     @Gargron

   • Embed this notice
     arjankroonen (arjankroonen@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 15:53:33 JST arjankroonen

     in reply to

     @Gargron But to be fair, it is doing a better job at pretending to be intelligent than tons of humans voting nowadays… so I’m not sure I really really care ablut the broad interpretation of “I” being used.

   • Embed this notice
     Blogging Life (blogginglife@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 19:08:29 JST Blogging Life

     in reply to

     @Gargron Completely agreed.

   • Embed this notice
     Paulo (pspssp@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 20:17:17 JST Paulo

     in reply to

     @Gargron always thought a better term would be "extreme fitting models"

   • Embed this notice
     Rafi C (glider85@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Dec-2023 22:48:52 JST Rafi C

     in reply to

     @Gargron I just went to a major US marketing conference in Sept, every single vendor was touting the 'AI-fication' of their products. It's ridiculous because we are customers, we know that they've just rebranded the ML stuff they were already doing!