← Back to context

Comment by dwattttt

2 hours ago

> I feel like that what a lot of people who say this don't seem to grasp, is that despite this flaw its still often capable of saying more interesting things than a lot of humans.

So does the Google search bar, but I don't ascribe intelligence to it.

The Google search bar is not capable of generating original text though. LLMs definitely are - you can get pretty creative output easily.

The google search bar is surprisingly smart sometimes. What's your definition of intelligence that completely excludes most of what a computer does?

  • Happily, I don't need to define "intelligence" here, because it's squarely in "I know it when I see it" territory. It's notoriously hard to define.

    I also don't ascribe intelligence to a pocket calculator.

    • I don't find it's particularly hard to define loosely, but then I don't think of it as a special property of humans other than it tends to be quite high in them. But we are obviously talking about different things and if you're not going to provide a definition then it's not really the basis for a productive conversation.

I mean I'm quite proud of some of my search queries in the same way I'm quite proud of some of the LLM output I get. I'm probably just very arrogant and enjoying myself via some LLM indirection.

Am I the only one that sometimes reads back particularly good emails they've written? I feel like its a similar thing :).