107
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
107 points (90.8% liked)
Ask Lemmy
26709 readers
2274 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics.
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
As a person who loves talking about AI I'd like to note that by AI "we" usually mean AGI (artificial general intelligence) and not generative AI like chatGPT or midjourney.
I love Sci-Fi. One of my favourite authors is Philip K. Dick and I've written stories about AI.
I cannot grant the concession that the likes of ChatGPT and Midjourney qualify for the moniker of AI. It would require lowering my standard for what I constitute to be intelligence, such as having a basic degree of awareness. ChatGPT for example will contradict itself and hallucinate information (not new information, just irrelevant and incorrect information) and can do so in the same response. This is not intelligence, this is the mere imitation of intelligence and that is not sufficient.
The AI that fascinates me is just an idea. No such thing, or really even anything close to it exists. Atleast not yet. It's more of a thought experiment and a philosophical dilemma. That however doesn't make me any less worried of it. This technology keeps making big leaps forward.
So do humans. I agree though. At best GPT4 only shows *signs of *intelligence. Still nothing close to AGI. Can't deny it's not impressive though.
When it comes to contradictions and hallucinations, sometimes people will put out contradictory information or act hypocritical, the difference is intention. ChatGPT can't help but make contradictions and hallucinations because it has no awareness of what information it's putting forth. It will very convincingly present incorrect information and not know that's what it's done.
It is impressive. Except it's being touted as more impressive than it actually is and that's what annoys me. The complete lack of critically evaluating these models and then giving into survivorship bias.
That's all aside from the privacy and copyright concerns.