3 ms·
their inability to invent and innovate is completely inherent to their design, and without the capacity for novelty it's been my opinion for a long time that ca
by dingnuts 2y ago
their inability to invent and innovate is completely inherent to their design, and without the capacity for novelty it's been my opinion for a long time that calling generative models "intelligence" is fundamentally a misnomer
I really think capacity for invention is a key characteristic of any kind of intelligence
- vundercind 2y agoYep, they’re guessing at patterns in language they’ve “seen” with weights and some randomness thrown in. They’d pick out patterns just as well if fed structured nonsense. They wouldn’t be stumped by the absence of meaning, confounded by it—they’d power right on, generating text, because understanding isn’t part of what they do. Plays zero role in it. They don’t “understand” anything whatsoever. At best, they’re a subsystem of system that could have something like intelligence. They’re still useful and cool tools but they simply aren’t “thinking” or “understanding” things, because we know what they do and it’s not that.
- stickfigure 2y ago> I really think capacity for invention is a key characteristic of any kind of intelligence I think you just categorized about 2/3 of the human population as unintelligent.
- dwattttt 2y agoInvention isn't some incredible rare gift; putting two things together that you've never personally seen done before is novel, even if it's food.
- stickfigure 2y agoThat's a low bar that LLMs have already surpassed. LLMs are perfectly capable of generating novel recipes. If I'm going to be brutally honest, they're probably better at it than my wife, and they don't even have taste buds.
- golergka 2y ago2/3 is an understatement.