3 ms·
At what point are we allowed to use the "reason" or "learn" for AI then? Can we use these terms for non-human animals? If so, which ones? I think LLMs are at t
by dimatura 4y ago
At what point are we allowed to use the "reason" or "learn" for AI then? Can we use these terms for non-human animals? If so, which ones?
I think LLMs are at the point where adopting an "intentional stance" (using Daniel Dennett's term) is reasonable.
- DonaldPShimoda 4y ago> At what point are we allowed to use the "reason" or "learn" for AI then? Maybe when the technology is physically capable of thinking for itself, rather than just being statistically likely to respond in a way that appears like the way a human would respond. Which may never happen, for what it's worth. > I think LLMs are at the point where adopting an "intentional stance" (using Daniel Dennett's term) is reasonable. I hadn't heard of this term so I looked into it, and wow, what a biased Wikipedia article it has. It's written with a completely partial stance. I've no idea whether to take it seriously, to be honest. That said, I disagree strongly. LLMs do not "intend" anything, and pretending they do is (in my view) highly problematic. They're just (sophisticated!) prediction engines; nothing more.