4 ms·

Truly, your reply is ridiculous in its comparison. How you could fail to see the difference between these two things, their scales and also their qualitative di

Truly, your reply is ridiculous in its comparison. How you could fail to see the difference between these two things, their scales and also their qualitative differences is impressive.

tim333 3y ago
Still there is a similarity between humans reading stuff, thinking about it and then writng something and AI doing the same.
- BriggyDwiggs42 3y ago
  I think if the ai were a free agent or something nobody would have an issue, but “the ai” isn’t really the best way to summarize the thing learning. It’s just a tool or service offered by a corporation which said corporation solely profits from.
Turing_Machine 3y ago
This is not an argument. This is essentially you saying "Why doesn't everyone agree with me, because I am self-evidently right?". It's basically a store-brand argumentum ad verecundiam, casting yourself in the position of authority. It should be obvious by now that there are many, many people who disagree with you without their arguments necessarily being "ridiculous". I mean, I too would enjoy it if everyone agreed with all my opinions all the time, but I don't expect that to actually happen.
- southernplaces7 3y ago
  In this case, the argument is indeed self evidently right. Trying to equate the two things after being able to observe both in the real world is like seriously claiming that a stove fire and a nuclear blast are pretty much the same thing because they both produce light and heat. Why would anyone bother convincing anyone out of such an obviously absurd claim in a practical context?
  - Turing_Machine 3y ago
    > In this case, the argument is indeed self evidently right. No, it absolutely is not. > obviously absurd claim You are obviously and absurdly wrong. It's clear that nothing productive is going to come of this conversation.

4 ms·

Truly, your reply is ridiculous in its comparison. How you could fail to see the difference between these two things, their scales and also their qualitative di

by southernplaces7 3y ago

Truly, your reply is ridiculous in its comparison. How you could fail to see the difference between these two things, their scales and also their qualitative differences is impressive.

tim333 3y ago
Still there is a similarity between humans reading stuff, thinking about it and then writng something and AI doing the same.
- BriggyDwiggs42 3y ago
  I think if the ai were a free agent or something nobody would have an issue, but “the ai” isn’t really the best way to summarize the thing learning. It’s just a tool or service offered by a corporation which said corporation solely profits from.
Turing_Machine 3y ago
This is not an argument. This is essentially you saying "Why doesn't everyone agree with me, because I am self-evidently right?". It's basically a store-brand argumentum ad verecundiam, casting yourself in the position of authority. It should be obvious by now that there are many, many people who disagree with you without their arguments necessarily being "ridiculous". I mean, I too would enjoy it if everyone agreed with all my opinions all the time, but I don't expect that to actually happen.
- southernplaces7 3y ago
  In this case, the argument is indeed self evidently right. Trying to equate the two things after being able to observe both in the real world is like seriously claiming that a stove fire and a nuclear blast are pretty much the same thing because they both produce light and heat. Why would anyone bother convincing anyone out of such an obviously absurd claim in a practical context?
  - Turing_Machine 3y ago
    > In this case, the argument is indeed self evidently right. No, it absolutely is not. > obviously absurd claim You are obviously and absurdly wrong. It's clear that nothing productive is going to come of this conversation.