4 ms·

I must say I don't understand your stance against extending the use of language to machines. Are you also arguing that "flying" should be reserved for birds and

I must say I don't understand your stance against extending the use of language to machines. Are you also arguing that "flying" should be reserved for birds and cannot be meaningfully applied to airplanes?

ggm 3y ago
No, i am not. Flying doesn't impart meaning of intentional behaviour. It's distance carried against height lost or gained pure and simple. Claim, believes, states, hallucinated, states, says argues all go to intelligence not just the input output situation. Maybe most unintentional flight is gliding, or controlled descent to ground. That said, can a dumb system keep a Kite aloft? I believe yes. No Ai needed. To me there is a clear difference. Ai language is not as direct as flying.
- falcor84 3y ago
  I'm sorry but I can't help but feel that this is just semantics. Growing up in the 90s, I remember that it felt perfectly apt to me that a chess engine is "Thinking..." as it does whatever it does to come up with its next move. And I don't recall ever feeling there's an oxymoron in "artificial intelligence".
  - awb 3y ago
    I think the difference is no one was suggesting that the chess engine was actually thinking. Here, when tokens are predicted in sequence developers are suggesting a motive behind the predicted sequence.
nottorp 3y ago
Interesting enough, all flying machines fly - that means both airplanes and lighter than air stuff. But ships and submarines don't swim. Although submarines do dive. Coming back from the finer points of the english language, the LLM in question is likely to be trained on text discussing LLM evaluation. So it ended up generating something about it. You LLM "activists" are doing yourselves a disservice speaking about them in religious tones. You lose some credibility.
- bondarchuk 3y ago
  >You LLM "activists" are doing yourselves a disservice speaking about them in religious tones. You lose some credibility. The word "suspecting" is not a word with religious connotations.

ggm 3y ago

No, i am not. Flying doesn't impart meaning of intentional behaviour. It's distance carried against height lost or gained pure and simple. Claim, believes, states, hallucinated, states, says argues all go to intelligence not just the input output situation. Maybe most unintentional flight is gliding, or controlled descent to ground. That said, can a dumb system keep a Kite aloft? I believe yes. No Ai needed. To me there is a clear difference. Ai language is not as direct as flying.

falcor84 3y ago
I'm sorry but I can't help but feel that this is just semantics. Growing up in the 90s, I remember that it felt perfectly apt to me that a chess engine is "Thinking..." as it does whatever it does to come up with its next move. And I don't recall ever feeling there's an oxymoron in "artificial intelligence".
- awb 3y ago
  I think the difference is no one was suggesting that the chess engine was actually thinking. Here, when tokens are predicted in sequence developers are suggesting a motive behind the predicted sequence.

nottorp 3y ago

Interesting enough, all flying machines fly - that means both airplanes and lighter than air stuff. But ships and submarines don't swim. Although submarines do dive. Coming back from the finer points of the english language, the LLM in question is likely to be trained on text discussing LLM evaluation. So it ended up generating something about it. You LLM "activists" are doing yourselves a disservice speaking about them in religious tones. You lose some credibility.

bondarchuk 3y ago
>You LLM "activists" are doing yourselves a disservice speaking about them in religious tones. You lose some credibility. The word "suspecting" is not a word with religious connotations.