this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2024
662 points (88.2% liked)

Memes

45663 readers
1011 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I think AI is neat.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DrJenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube 167 points 9 months ago (63 children)

They're kind of right. LLMs are not general intelligence and there's not much evidence to suggest that LLMs will lead to general intelligence. A lot of the hype around AI is manufactured by VCs and companies that stand to make a lot of money off of the AI branding/hype.

[–] casmael@lemm.ee 35 points 9 months ago (21 children)

Yeah this sounds about right. What was OP implying I’m a bit lost?

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 46 points 9 months ago (8 children)

I believe they were implying that a lot of the people who say "it's not real AI it's just an LLM" are simply parroting what they've heard.

Which is a fair point, because AI has never meant "general AI", it's an umbrella term for a wide variety of intelligence like tasks as performed by computers.
Autocorrect on your phone is a type of AI, because it compares what words you type against a database of known words, compares what you typed to those words via a "typo distance", and adds new words to it's database when you overrule it so it doesn't make the same mistake.

It's like saying a motorcycle isn't a real vehicle because a real vehicle has two wings, a roof, and flies through the air filled with hundreds of people.

[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I've often seen people on Lemmy confidently state that current "AI" thinks and learns exactly like humans and that LLMs work exactly like human brains, etc.

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 months ago

Are you sure this wasn't just people stating that when it comes to training on art there is no functional difference in the sense that both humans and AI need to see art to make it?

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Weird, I don't think I've ever seen that even remotely claimed.

Closest I think I've come is the argument that legally, AI learning systems are similar to how humans learn, namely storing information about information.

[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 0 points 9 months ago

It's usually some rant about "brains are just probability machines as well" or "every artists learns from thousands of pictures of other artists, just as image generator xy does".

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (58 replies)