3 ms·
That's a fallacy of denial of the antecedent. You are inferring from the fact that airplanes really fly that AIs really think, but it's not a logically valid in
by jibal 11mo ago
That's a fallacy of denial of the antecedent. You are inferring from the fact that airplanes really fly that AIs really think, but it's not a logically valid inference.
- hackernewds 11mo agoYeah at that point, just arguing semantics
- fc417fc802 11mo agoObserving a common (potential) failure mode is not equivalent to asserting a logical inference. It is only a fallacy if you "P, therefore C" which GP is not (at least to my eye) doing.
- jibal 11mo ago"Observing a common (potential) failure mode" That's not what we have here. "It is only a fallacy if you "P, therefore C" which GP is not (at least to my eye) doing." Some people are willfully blind.