3 ms·
> Exactly. 5 years ago, we would have said what GPT-4 is doing now would be AGI. okay, and 500 years ago we would have said it was magic, that doesn't make it
by krainboltgreene 3y ago
> Exactly. 5 years ago, we would have said what GPT-4 is doing now would be AGI.
okay, and 500 years ago we would have said it was magic, that doesn't make it magic. people who don't understand the thing often are confused about the thing. as soon as you explain how the whole mechanism works it's obvious that it's not that thing.
> People are forgetting how stupid people are. GPT is already better than average human. Most people can't do what we claim GPT must be capable of to qualify as AGI. The only logical conclusion is that many people are also not conscious and don't qualify as being able to reason.
citation massively needed, this sounds like it was written by someone who thinks idiocracy was a documentary and not a comedy.
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoIdiocracy wasn't a documentary? Have you worked with people? This sounds like someone sitting in their study, by the fire, smoking a pipe, adjusting their monocle and saying "hmm, Indubitably". Think you are taking extreme opposite view, like humans have some holy essence that can't be understood or duplicated. Which is also not correct. Of course, technology that is not-understood can appear as magic. But nobody said anything of the sort. The discussion was around AGI, will AI be as 'intelligent(loaded term)' as human. And I'm saying, a lot of people aren't doing anything that takes much 'intelligence' and current AI is already good enough to replace a large chunk of humans. Right now it is fragmented, there is AI that can beat GO, there is AI that can outfly an F-16 and beat human pilots, there is AI GPT/LLMs. It wont take much to start tying together technologies and have something that 'appears' human. And if it is indistinguishable, then how can we prove it isn't conscious, or opposite, prove that we are.