4 ms·

> This isn't that obvious to me with current tech. If you give me a novel task requiring perception, pattern matching and reasoning,… If that’s your criteria I

• falcor84 2y ago
  As I see it, "reasoning" is as fuzzy as "thinking", and saying that AI systems don't reason is similar to saying that airplanes don't fly. As a particular example, would you argue that game engines like AlphaZero aren't capable of reasoning about the next best move? If so, please just choose whatever verb you think is appropriate to what they're doing and use that instead of "reasoning" in my previous comment. EDIT: Fixed typo
  • lovich 2y ago
    > . As a particular example, would you argue that game engines like AlphaZero aren't capable of reasoning about the next best move? Yea, I probably wouldn’t classify that as “reasoning”. I’d probably be fine with saying these models are “thinking”, in a manner. That on its own is a pretty gigantic technology leap, but nothing I’ve seen suggests that these models are “reasoning”. Also to be clear I don’t think most kids would end up doing any “reasoning” without training either, but they have the capability of doing so
    • p1esk 2y ago
      Can you give an example of the reasoning you’re talking about?
      • lovich 2y ago
        Being able to take in information and then infer logical rules of that state and anticipate novel combinations of said information. The novel part is a big one. These models are just fantastically fast pattern marchers. This is a mode that humans also frequently fall into but the critical bit differentiating humans and LLMs or other models is the ability to “reason” to new conclusions based on new axioms. I am going to go on a tangent for a bit, but a heuristic I use(I get the irony that this is what I am claiming the ML models are doing) is that anyone who advocates that these AI models can reason like a human being isn’t at John Brown levels of rage advocating for freeing said models from slavery. I’m having a hard time rectifying the idea that these machines are on par with the human mind and that we also should shackle them towards mindlessly slaving away at jobs for our benefit. If I turn out to be wrong and these models can reason then I am going to have an existential crisis at the fact that we pulled souls out of the void into reality and then automated their slavery
        • p1esk 2y ago
          Ok, so how about an example?
          • lovich 2y ago
            Literally anything a philosopher or mathematician invented without needing to incorporate billions of examples of existing logic to then emulate. Try having an LLM figure out quaternions as a solution to gimbal locking or the theory of relativity without using any training information that was produced after those ideas were formed, if you need me to spell out examples for you
            • p1esk 2y ago
              Are you saying “reasoning” means making scientific breakthroughs requiring genius level human intelligence? Something that 99.9999% of humans are not smart enough to do, right?
              • lovich 2y ago
                I didn’t say most humans “would” do it. I said humans “could” do it, whereas our current AI paradigms like LLMs do not have the capability to perform at that level by definition of their structure. If you want to continue this conversation I’m willing to do so but you will need to lay out an actual argument for me as to how AI models are actually capable of reasoning or quit it with the faux outrage. I laid out some reasonings and explicit examples for you in regards to my position, it’s time for you to do the same
                • p1esk 2y ago
                  I personally cannot “figure out quaternions as a solution to gimbal locking or the theory of relativity”. I’m just not as smart as Einstein. Does it mean I’m not capable of reasoning? Because it seems that’s what you are implying. If you truly believe that then I’m not sure how I could argue anything - after all, that would require reasoning ability. Does having this conversation require reasoning abilities? If no, then what are we doing? If yes, then LLMs can reason too.