People might say something like “ai is incapable of thinking” or “ai is stupid”, but if you replace the word “ai” with something like “women”, you’re saying something unacceptable.
Yeah that was my biggest takeaway is these posts seem to assume sentience in what’s little more than a sophisticated “most likely next word” generator. There’s tons of cool things that can be done with these new machine learning tools, but they are not sentient, they are not close to sentience and we may never invent artificial sentience.
The one thing we now know for sure is we can damn well convince people of sentience artificially far more easily than I ever suspected
I’m so confused reading all this.
Their argument is something like this:
People might say something like “ai is incapable of thinking” or “ai is stupid”, but if you replace the word “ai” with something like “women”, you’re saying something unacceptable.
So they’re attributing personhood to AI.
Before it has come anywhere close to meaningfully mimicking conciousness.
Are they stupid?
Yeah that was my biggest takeaway is these posts seem to assume sentience in what’s little more than a sophisticated “most likely next word” generator. There’s tons of cool things that can be done with these new machine learning tools, but they are not sentient, they are not close to sentience and we may never invent artificial sentience.
The one thing we now know for sure is we can damn well convince people of sentience artificially far more easily than I ever suspected
AI believers believe that stringing random words together is equal to consciousness, they absolutely are stupid.
Perhaps because it reflects their level of consciousness.
Ah makes sense now! So if I change the meaning, then the meaning changes. Man, that’s brilliant!