alt Hacker NewsThis is both real and ridiculous at the same time. We are confounded by the fact that AIs are trained on distilled human knowledge, perfected by the use of AIs that use distilled human knowledge, are able to convince ourselves that they are hyper-intelligent.
In fact, they are still pattern-matching machines, but trained on an amount of data no human could ever hold. They know the ins and outs of every mathematical proof, viewed from more angles than any human could ever apply in their lifetime, and the amount of connections allows them to connect the dots between them without any effort.
But that's not intelligence. If it was intelligence, ChatGPT 4 would've been enough. It's not the harness, either, for the same reason.
And still, the technology is just as dangerous: it masks as intelligence, it IS intelligence, but without the ability to be actually intelligent.
And I'd invite you to think deeply about this, before having an impulse reaction.
Replies
Based on the profile description of the author, the comment appears to be AI generated.
2022 called and they want their stochastic parrot argument back. The latest cope is to call it marketing.
What if intelligence is a spectrum? What if consciousness is for that matter?
[dead]
This is not an impulse reaction, as I've thought deeply about this for many years, and I'm quite resolute in holding the following view:
Quibbling over the academic nature/definition of "true intelligence" is a terrifically useless endeavor from the lens of evaluating "practical impact to the world".
Regardless of whether or not one academically disagrees that these systems are intelligent, they are clearly already capable of permanently displacing a portion of human-based economic value. A small portion currently, but it's very clear that most computer-bound domains are imminently at-risk.
And that will profoundly affect the world, regardless of whether or not they're "truly intelligent" as per your personal definition.