3 ms·
About this goalpost moving thing. It's become very popular to say this, but I have no idea what it's supposed to mean. It's like a metaphor with no underlying r
by civilized 3y ago
About this goalpost moving thing. It's become very popular to say this, but I have no idea what it's supposed to mean. It's like a metaphor with no underlying reality.
Did a wise arbiter of truth set up goalposts that I moved? I guess I didn't get the memo.
If the implied claim is "GPT would invent math too given enough time", go ahead and make that claim.
- IshKebab 3y ago> Did a wise arbiter of truth set up goalposts that I moved? Collectively, yes. The criticism of AI has always been "well it isn't AI because it can't do [thing just beyond its abilities]. Maybe individually your goalpost hasn't moved, and as soon as it invents some maths you'll say "yep, it's intelligent" (though I strongly doubt it). But collectively the naysayers in general will find another reason why it's not really intelligent. Not like us. It's very tedious.
- civilized 3y agoOther than complaining about perceived inconsistencies in others' positions, what do you actually believe? Do you think GPT is AGI?
- IshKebab 3y agoNo. I don't think anyone seriously believes that. AGI requires human level reasoning and it hasn't achieved that, despite what benchmarks show (they tend to focus on "how many did it get right" more than "how many did it fail in stupid ways"). The issue with most criticism of LLMs wrt AGI is that they come up with totally bogus reasons why it isn't and can't ever be real intelligence. It's just predicting the next word. It's a stochastic parrot. It's only repeating stuff it has been trained on. It doesn't have quantum microtubules. It can't really reason. It has some failure modes that humans don't. It can't do <some difficult task that most humans can't do>. Seems to be mostly people feeling threatened. Very tedious.