The pioneering computer scientist on why Trump is using ‘superintelligence’ wrong, whether AI could wipe out humanity – and how our biggest challenge will be accepting we’re not the only intelligent beings
You are anthropomorphizing LLMs: This is a mistake. They are not people and they do not think, reason, or feel. They are completely incapable of these things. Even calling it “AI” is misleading at best.
I am not. I want to understand what is the difference between “feeling” as result of electrochemical reactions in our brain and “feeling” as result of math performed on a numerical matrix. I am perfectly aware those are not the same, but the result may be similar, and what we care of the result determines the conclusions we can make.
You need to clearly explain what is thinking and what in the “thinking” process of LLM is not thinking. If you define “thinking” as electromechanical reactions in human brains then LLM is not thinking, but it is not a useful definition.
I don’t need to explain shit, you’re the one made the claims and didn’t provide proof. The burden of proof is on you. We can (and should) dismiss your baseless unproven claims about “AI” outright.
I’m already dropping it because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Here even mediocre evidence hasn’t been provided to back up ridiculous claims anthropomorphizing “AI” so we are free to dismiss them outright.
Furthermore, you’re now trying to claim there are no such claims, which is obviously ridiculous, so feel free to fuck off and troll somebody else because I am done entertaining your bullshit.
I easily quoted your claim, you failed to do the same with mine. So I guess it is you who is dropping your claim. Seriously come to grips with reality and logic.
You are anthropomorphizing LLMs: This is a mistake. They are not people and they do not think, reason, or feel. They are completely incapable of these things. Even calling it “AI” is misleading at best.
I am not. I want to understand what is the difference between “feeling” as result of electrochemical reactions in our brain and “feeling” as result of math performed on a numerical matrix. I am perfectly aware those are not the same, but the result may be similar, and what we care of the result determines the conclusions we can make.
You need to clearly explain what is thinking and what in the “thinking” process of LLM is not thinking. If you define “thinking” as electromechanical reactions in human brains then LLM is not thinking, but it is not a useful definition.
I don’t need to explain shit, you’re the one made the claims and didn’t provide proof. The burden of proof is on you. We can (and should) dismiss your baseless unproven claims about “AI” outright.
Do you even know what a claim is?
This is a claim. You made a claim. My assertion that you need to substantiate your claim definitionally does not constitute a claim.
Bullshit: The claim was made without evidence, I dismissed baseless claim.
Not even close to being the same. Do YOU know what a claim is?
Please quote the claim I made you disputed, I will try to defend it or drop it.
I’m already dropping it because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Here even mediocre evidence hasn’t been provided to back up ridiculous claims anthropomorphizing “AI” so we are free to dismiss them outright.
Furthermore, you’re now trying to claim there are no such claims, which is obviously ridiculous, so feel free to fuck off and troll somebody else because I am done entertaining your bullshit.
You are doing everything yourself 😂
I easily quoted your claim, you failed to do the same with mine. So I guess it is you who is dropping your claim. Seriously come to grips with reality and logic.