6 ms·
If we could show the current models to someone like Alan Turing, I am sure he would conclude that we have AGI.
by kkoncevicius 1mo ago
If we could show the current models to someone like Alan Turing, I am sure he would conclude that we have AGI.
- throwatdem12311 1mo agoYou say that they pass the Turing test yet every post on HN complains about the way LLMs write so clearly they haven’t passed it yet because we can still tell it’s a bot.
- pinkgolem 1mo agoYou can also change the writing style with a prompt quit easily, if the same person would publish millions of articles, we would also recognize them.
- PunchTornado 1mo agoI don't understand. do you think that people can't figure it out if they speak with llms or not from a few turns?
- quantumspandex 1mo agoWe don't train current LLMs to mimic the average human's writing style. We train it to be smart, helpful, and knowledgable, too knowledgeable for a human. We can easily train a LLM to pass the Turing test if we wanted to, but then it would just sound dumb or biased.
- guelo 1mo agoThere is tons of money trying to get customer support bots to sound human but they fool nobody.
- throwatdem12311 1mo ago> but it would just sound dumb or biased We have one of those: Grok.
- hobofan 1mo agoYes, and it's indistinguishable from the average X user.
- throwatdem12311 1mo agoBold of you to assume they’re actual users.
- virgilp 1mo ago> We can easily train a LLM to pass the Turing test if we wanted to, but then it would just sound dumb or biased. Interesting idea. "This is not dumb and biased enough, probably not a human".
- throwatdem12311 1mo agoThe Turing Test is about being able to figure out if “someone” is a computer during a short conversation, not “millions of articles”. LLMs still live in the uncanny valley and can be sussed out immediately. For example, I’m extremely annoyed by the fact that offshore developers respond to me almost exclusively using text generated by Claude. You can tell immediately because they use overly descriptive techno word salad that no normal human uses unless they are trying to be ultra specific for a scientific paper - and even then it’s still too much for a real person.
- pinkgolem 1mo agoMy argument is, you recognize the style because you know it.. 5 years ago, you would not have been able to determine that this was the case, and just have assumed it's a know it all character. Tell your offshore developers to use caveman or so
- hk__2 1mo agoI think we’re just adapting. LLM felt kind of magical at first, and now we’re all experts in detecting AI slope.
- stymaar 1mo agoAnd after half an hour using it he'd just admit that his test was way too simple as these models are still way too dumb
- klibertp 1mo agoI think of the Turing test as one of the starting lines, along with image recognition ("a summer break project for a group of grad students" resisted being solved for decades). It is a huge leap. Now we can start talking about "intelligence" at all - we really couldn't before. That we're still hovering barely above the starting line is a separate matter (also worth noting, of course).
- stavros 1mo agoHow are the models too dumb? How are they dumber than the average person? I wonder if anyone gave Claude an IQ test (the one for humans).
- chippiewill 1mo agoTuring was a helluva smart guy, but he doesn't have the benefit of hindsight.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]