6 ms·
Aren't we also machines? If we make theories that discount our own intelligence that's just throwing our hands up and giving up. Maybe I would agree with you i
by makin 3y ago
Aren't we also machines? If we make theories that discount our own intelligence that's just throwing our hands up and giving up.
Maybe I would agree with you if LLMs weren't already embedded in a lot of useful products. I myself measurably save a lot of time using ChatGPT in such "unintelligent conversations". It's intelligent in the ways that matter for a tool.
- nottorp 3y agoIMO you're using the wrong term or have a low bar for 'intelligence'. It's reasonably good at reproducing text and mixing it. Like a lazy high school student that has to write an essay but won't just download one. Instead they'll mix and match stuff off several online sources so it seems original although it isn't. That may be intelligence but it doesn't justify the religious like tone some people use when talking about LLMs.
- joeythedolphin 3y agoI don't know, it's more then this. I ask ChatGPT to teach me all about Hinduism, the siva purana, ancient indian customs, etc., and it is an incredible tutor. I can ask it to analyze things from a Jungian perspective. I can ask it to consider ideas from a non-typical perspective, etc. It is pretty incredible, it is more then a word gargler.
- nottorp 3y ago"teach you all". So you don't know enough to evaluate the answers. Or where to find the original sources it quoted or mixed.
- throwuwu 3y agoOriginal sources aren’t necessarily infallible either, but that’s beside the point, asking ChatGPT needs to be viewed as asking a person to recount something from memory. It hasn’t been reviewed or edited so it’s like a first draft rather than a published document. That’s the error that people tend to make since they treat it like a search engine instead of a conversation.
- nottorp 3y ago> they treat it like a search engine instead of a conversation. That's because web searches are so polluted that for a lot of purposes even ChatGPT 3.5 is better.
- joeythedolphin 3y agoUm yes I do? Lol why do you just assume this?
- EchoChamberMan 3y agoIt is, unquestionably, from the math, a "word gargler" as you put it. https://xkcd.com/1838/ https://xkcd.com/1838/
- joeythedolphin 3y agoNo it's a digital neural network expressing it's inputs and outputs in language.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- EchoChamberMan 3y agoIf you trust the words that machine strings together, you're making dangerous assumptions - look at the lawyers getting busted for submitting fake cases. These things are literally designed to sound plausible as the primary concern - facts aren't really a thing.