3 ms·
No, I did say that animal intelligence has some characteristics. I think I made it clear that metacognition is more optional but I may have written less clearly
by bemusedthrow75 3y ago
No, I did say that animal intelligence has some characteristics. I think I made it clear that metacognition is more optional but I may have written less clearly.
However, I was responding to assertions made specifically about GPT, not some other or future AI.
Other AI systems may be different (I am enthusiastic about Steve Grand’s approach for example) but GPT is not “thinking” by any useful stretch of the word.
I am not placing human intelligence at the pinnacle. I am rebutting the idea that GPT is usefully thinking. It alarms me how many people are willing to strongly suggest it has magical, unknown emergent abilities, when all it can really do is surface embedded logic in the corpus of the written word.
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoah. Ok, if it was specific to GPT. Got it. I was extrapolating the arguments to all AI. I think the reason people are freaking out about GPT/LLM, is it is dealing with 'natural language' specificaly. However it is doing it, forget all the arguments about consciousness. It is touching on something with the general human that they believe is specific to humans. There is something about having a computer 'understand' and 'speak back' in natural language, that triggers humans on some level. It's something that wasn't supposed to happen, because it is 'innately' human. People said "it will take a 100 years", and now it is happening.