4 ms·
Saying that humans are not stochastic parrots because it makes you feel bad isn’t really proof that we aren’t parrots. I’m not saying we are parrots, just that
by rokob 1y ago
Saying that humans are not stochastic parrots because it makes you feel bad isn’t really proof that we aren’t parrots. I’m not saying we are parrots, just that many of the arguments in the post are unfounded vitriol.
- AstralStorm 1y agoUnfounded? Especially the ones about Altmann are verifiable quotes...
- drweevil 1y agoIf two entities--one an "AI", one a real, thinking person--happen to say the same thing, one is a stochastic parrot, and one isn't. The "real, thinking" part is what makes all the difference. We use language to communicate thoughts. These hucksters are taking advantage of the conflation of languages and the thoughts they are used to convey to pretend they have invented thinking machines.
- ziftface 1y agoIt's not necessary to provide proof that humans are not machines which do nothing but guess the next likely word. But also feeling anything at all is proof of that.
- roarcher 1y agoThat's not what the author is saying. Calling humans "stochastic parrots" implies that there's no actual thought or meaning behind what they say, that their output is a probabilistic process with no "driver". The author points out that his own output in response to this idea is driven by his feeling of disgust towards it. A disproof by counterexample.