They are choosing to abstain from using artificial intelligence for environmental, ethical and personal reasons. Maybe they have a point, writes Guardian columnist Arwa Mahdawi
AI is short for artificial intelligence. But its not intelligence if it just repeats what it grabed from somewhere. Only self thinking makes intelligence
Affirmations without argumentation can be dismissed without argumentation
Saying AI is a sorting algorithm is just inaccurate. What can I say apart from its just not how it works? Anyone who studied that field knows how much they’re dishonest. They are just too many possibilities and types of AI to list them all
At this point a video game is just a glorified sorting algorithm of pixels of color
It’s not really about feelings? It’s provably, demonstrably wrong a bunch of the time. It’s pathologically incapable of saying “I don’t know this”. Also you’re nitpicking, they may have conflated LLMs with AI but so is the article and you clearly knew what OC was talking about.
So you’re just going to throw the creativity aspect of it, or that it is right a good portion of the time?
You’re going to ignore the gigantic demand for AI, and the thousands of people that have a productivity gain from it?
All tools have issues. AI doesn’t have to be the one tool that’s either all or nothing. If you approach it with a neutral angle and try to work with it the right way, I’m sure you’ll benefit from it. Some basic uses are really good:
Summarizing text
Proposing better or alternative wording
Inventing short paragraphs, stories, other similar stuff
mimicking a style
knowledge and questions about basic and broadly known subjects
asking for similar tools or notions
speech recognition, and text to speech (still limited)
image editing
Bug fixing (software recommendations, centralized diagnostics (still limited but faster and easier))
quickly getting infos on a subject that are easy to understand (limited, just like searching on internet without taking the time to search more)
But yes. Exactly in the use of “Artificial Intelligence”.
Artificial Intelligence is a wide field, consisting of a plethora of methods. LLMs like ChatGPT are part of this wide field, as per definition how researchers are describing the field.
The “intelligence” part is an issue though if taken literal, since we have no clear definition of what “intelligence” even is. Neither for human / natural intelligence, nor for artificial. But that’s how the field was labled. We have created a category for a bunch of methods, models and algorithms and sticked “AI” onto it. Therefore I stand by what I have said before:
It is AI.
Due to the lack of a clear definition for “intelligence” I would coarsely outline AI as: mimicking natural thinking, problem solving and decision processes without necessarily being identical. (This makes it difficult to distinguish it from plain calculators though, so a better definition is required.) So if we have a model that is able to distinguish cat pictures from non-cat pictures, that’s AI. And if we have “autocorrect on steroids” (credit to Dirk Hohndel) like ChatGPT, that matches the text comprehension skills of 15 year olds (just an example), then this too is AI.
I was going to wholeheartedly endorse your comment and then you ruin it in the last sentence with
that matches the text comprehension skills of 15 year olds (just an example), then this too is AI.
It feels like you know what you are talking about, but then confuse the successful statistical analysis of text as “comprehension” which is just plain factually wrong.
One fundamental part of “intelligence” is being able to come up with independent thoughts. Another is to be able to think critically about those thoughts. LLMs cannot do either.
I don’t use ai either. But because it’s fuckin stupid. It’s not even ai. It’s a glorified sorting algorithm.
What would make it ‘ai’ in your mind?
Sentience
Why?
AI is short for artificial intelligence. But its not intelligence if it just repeats what it grabed from somewhere. Only self thinking makes intelligence
What is self-thinking? Do you mean self-awareness?
Hard copium there
“AI” or LLMs are great for people without skill. They love them and get quite aggressive when you insult the machine.
I love the arguments: none
AI is broader than LLMs
When you’re attacking an entire field with no arguments, and saying it’s shit based on your feelings rather than facts, expect people to disagree
You mean I should have instead replied with good solid arguments like:
Affirmations without argumentation can be dismissed without argumentation
Saying AI is a sorting algorithm is just inaccurate. What can I say apart from its just not how it works? Anyone who studied that field knows how much they’re dishonest. They are just too many possibilities and types of AI to list them all
At this point a video game is just a glorified sorting algorithm of pixels of color
It’s not really about feelings? It’s provably, demonstrably wrong a bunch of the time. It’s pathologically incapable of saying “I don’t know this”. Also you’re nitpicking, they may have conflated LLMs with AI but so is the article and you clearly knew what OC was talking about.
So you’re just going to throw the creativity aspect of it, or that it is right a good portion of the time?
You’re going to ignore the gigantic demand for AI, and the thousands of people that have a productivity gain from it?
All tools have issues. AI doesn’t have to be the one tool that’s either all or nothing. If you approach it with a neutral angle and try to work with it the right way, I’m sure you’ll benefit from it. Some basic uses are really good:
It is AI.
Not if you use “AI” as the abbreviation of “artificial intelligence”.
If you use AI as meaning “what chatGPT & co are” then it’s a trueism.
But yes. Exactly in the use of “Artificial Intelligence”.
Artificial Intelligence is a wide field, consisting of a plethora of methods. LLMs like ChatGPT are part of this wide field, as per definition how researchers are describing the field.
The “intelligence” part is an issue though if taken literal, since we have no clear definition of what “intelligence” even is. Neither for human / natural intelligence, nor for artificial. But that’s how the field was labled. We have created a category for a bunch of methods, models and algorithms and sticked “AI” onto it. Therefore I stand by what I have said before:
It is AI.
Due to the lack of a clear definition for “intelligence” I would coarsely outline AI as: mimicking natural thinking, problem solving and decision processes without necessarily being identical. (This makes it difficult to distinguish it from plain calculators though, so a better definition is required.) So if we have a model that is able to distinguish cat pictures from non-cat pictures, that’s AI. And if we have “autocorrect on steroids” (credit to Dirk Hohndel) like ChatGPT, that matches the text comprehension skills of 15 year olds (just an example), then this too is AI.
I was going to wholeheartedly endorse your comment and then you ruin it in the last sentence with
It feels like you know what you are talking about, but then confuse the successful statistical analysis of text as “comprehension” which is just plain factually wrong.
sad. so close though.
One fundamental part of “intelligence” is being able to come up with independent thoughts. Another is to be able to think critically about those thoughts. LLMs cannot do either.
Enjoy being downvoted for being right
I don’t care about votes. I just hope that people start to comprehend this field a tiny bit better .
They won’t, because their opinion is political and ideological, not technical