Comment by farias0
3 months ago
You mean we're not there in simulating an actual human brain? Sure. But we're seeing AI work like a human well enough to be useful, isn't that the point?
3 months ago
You mean we're not there in simulating an actual human brain? Sure. But we're seeing AI work like a human well enough to be useful, isn't that the point?
Not if we’re pretending it is any inteligent. Other than that I’m all in for new utility to come out from it. But I do see a lot of tangents off technology with claims to something it is not. I have no problem of calling that out. Why do you mind? Just ignore me if Im holding your enthusiasm back, there’s plenty of sources to provide that for you.
> Not if we’re pretending it is any inteligent.
We have been shifting the definition of what it means to be intelligent every 3 months following the advances of LLM...
There's also this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed-world_assumption
I wonder, once LLM's exceed Humans beyond some substantial threshold, will it crack the simulation allowing us to get back in the game again.
2 replies →
So what? I’m not disputing that the immitation of intelligence is not good and it gets better and better every 3 months or so. But that doesn’t mean anything, even if it gets close to 99.9%. It is not real intlligence and it is quite limited in what it does. If LLMs solve logic or problems or chemistry problems it is solely not because it made a leap in understanding but because it was trained on a zillion examples. If you have a similar problem it will try to showhorn an answer without understanding where it fails. Am I saying this is useless? NO. What I’m saying is that the current approach to intelligence is missing some key ingredients. Im actually surprised so many get fooled by the hype and are ready to declare a winner. Human intelligence with it’s major flaws is still king of the hill.
5 replies →