428
vines of the animal kingdom (mander.xyz)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
53 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

Ai (as in current LLM's and the like) does not think. It predicts what word sounds right based on what we humans have written. It cannot make up thoughts or original concepts, synthesize info, etc. Being able to string sentences together based on probability is not necessarily intelligence or consciousness

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    So you're saying it's dumber than this worm? Wowzers, that's a hardline stance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well, yes, it is. It doesn't meet the minimum definition for sentience, let alone intelligence. You may as well be upset with how poorly we treat rocks.

    Actually now that I think about it, you are upset with how we treat rocks. Computer chips are just silicon shot full of lightning and an AI is a function of its chips. We could eventually reach a point where we've created a true thinking AI on this substrate but we are so hilariously far away from even the beginnings of that, right now, that using it as a talking point is silly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    It’s arguable whether the worm has intelligence of any kind, after all it wouldn’t even need it.Neither the worm or AI has any intelligence to compare because they don’t really think at all

    AI isn’t called AI because it can think. AI is just a tech buzzword for predictive algorithms

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    No, they both have intelligence. Intelligence is the ability to process information. A pocket calculator has intelligence. A domino computer has intelligence. Settlers of Catan has intelligence - the rules contain an algorithm for determining who wins.

    What you're doing is deifying intelligence. You're making it into a bigger thing than it is. You're setting "Intelligence" apart from normal everyday information processing that even an abacus can do. The problem with that practice is that now you have no word to describe the ability to process information.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You do have a word to define that: the ability to process information. Defining intelligence in such a broad way makes the distinction practically meaningless. You cannot tell me with a straight face that you and I have the same intelligence as the phone in our pockets; there is a clear distinction between how we parse information and how a phone does.

    I honestly don’t see what the main argument of all of this was anymore. If you were arguing that AI has intelligence and can think like us, and that we should treat it that way, then I guess we should emancipate every kind of predictive algorithm while we’re at it. Autocorrect has been oppressed for too long!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    You do have a word to define that: the ability to process information

    That's not a word, that's a phrase. A long one too. And it's the definition of intelligence.

    You cannot tell me with a straight face that you and I have the same intelligence as the phone in our pockets

    Good thing drag didn't say that. Drag said the phone in your pocket has intelligence. You added the part about it being the same intelligence as us. Don't do that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I guess you are right in that it is a phrase rather than one word. The point that I was trying to say is that oversimplifying what defines intelligence makes the distinction useless. There is a use in defining the difference between a phone computing numbers and our ability to think and I probably should’ve explained it like that

    On an unrelated note, I keep seeing you refer to someone called drag. Is this you but in the 3rd person? Are there more than one dragon rider?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    Drag uses person independent neopronouns. Drag's pronoun is inflected and conjugated the same way in all grammatical persons.

    And drag disagrees that there's a singular distinction to be made between humans and worms. There's a spectrum of difference. Every improvement is an incremental leap. We got here over a billion years of evolution. It didn't happen all at once. Setting ourselves apart from the rest of nature disconnects us and damages our empathy. Human supremacy is the reason we eat meat. Drag is a vegan because drag values all intelligent lifeforms.

    Also, did you know soy is capable of acting to defend itself? When aphids eat soy, it releases a chemical that smells delicious to ladybugs. The ladybugs come to check it out, and find a yummy aphid lunch. With the aphids eaten, the soy is safe. Nature is so cool. And you can call drag a hippie if you like.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent