4 ms·
Well, it's all about linguistic relativism, right? If you can define "user harm" in terms of things it does understand, I think you could get something that wor
by iamgioh 9mo ago
Well, it's all about linguistic relativism, right? If you can define "user harm" in terms of things it does understand, I think you could get something that works
- emsign 9mo agoThe idea that language influences the world view isn't new, it was speculated upon long before artificial intelligence was a thing, but it explicitely speculates about having an influence on the world view of humans. It doesn't postulate that language itself creates a worldview in whatever system processes text. Or else books would have a worldview. It's a categeory error to apply it to an LLM. Language works on humans, because we share a common experience as humans, it's not just a logical description of thoughts, it's also an arrangement of symbols that stand for experiences a human can have. That why humans are able to empathically experience a story, because it triggers much more than just rational thought inside their brains.
- dragonwriter 9mo ago> It doesn't postulate that language itself creates a worldview in whatever system processes text. Or else books would have a worldview. Books don't process text.
- emsign 8mo agoAgain LLMs DO NOT THINK. If you quote me then at least do it correctly, I never said "processing text" is equal to human thinking, my entire point is the opposite. The "magic" still happens in OUR brains no matter if we read a fixed text (book) or a predicted text by an LLM. It's both illusions created by ourselves.