3 ms·
> oftentimes the truly zealous AI pundits act as if our modern day LLMs are completely, 100% equivalent to humans, which I find utterly insane as a concept Nev
by concordDance 3y ago
> oftentimes the truly zealous AI pundits act as if our modern day LLMs are completely, 100% equivalent to humans, which I find utterly insane as a concept
Never heard anyone say this and I know (and know of) a lot of doomers. Honestly, this entire line of discussion would be far less frustrating if it weren't for the endless strawmanning and name-calling.
- _heimdall 3y agoI'm sure most would put me pretty far onto the doomer side. I can confirm that I'm not concerned with how LLMs compare to human equivalence today. I'm concerned with whether they are artificial intelligence at all, what the bounding functions for AI's development are, how we could possibly solve the alignment problem, and whether we even understand human intelligence enough to recognize an artificial intelligence at all or predict how intelligence might work in something drastically more powerful than us.