3 ms·
Because it's so entirely reductive and misunderstanding of where the technology has progressed. Hello world is s computer program. So it Microsoft Windows. New
by km3r 8mo ago
Because it's so entirely reductive and misunderstanding of where the technology has progressed. Hello world is s computer program. So it Microsoft Windows. New levels of "intelligence" unlock with greater complexity of a program.
Like look at our brains. We know decently well how a single neuron works. We can simulate a single one with "just a computer program". But clearly with enough layers some form of complexity can emerge, and at some level that complexity becomes intelligence.
- andsoitis 8mo ago> with enough layers some form of complexity can emerge, and at some level that complexity becomes intelligence. It isn’t a given that complexity begets intelligence.
- PaulDavisThe1st 8mo agoand it isn't a given that it doesn't, so maybe a little openness towards the possibility is warranted?
- andsoitis 8mo agoI’m open, but the comment I responded to asserted: “complexity becomes intelligence”, as if it is a fact. And it isn’t proven.
- DiogenesKynikos 8mo agoWe have LLMs, which are obviously intelligent. How is it not proven?
- PaulDavisThe1st 8mo agoThere is no "obvious" about it, unless you define "intelligent" in a rather narrow (albeit Turing-esque) way. The suspicion is that they are good at predicting next-token and not much else. This is still a research topic at this point, from my reading.
- DiogenesKynikos 8mo agoYou can't predict the next token in an arbitrary text unless you are highly intelligent and have a vast body of knowledge. They're obviously intelligent in the way that we judge intelligence in humans: we pay attention to what they say. You ask them a question about an arbitrary subject, and they respond in the same way that an intelligent person would. If you don't consider that intelligence, then you have a fundamentally magical, unscientific view of what intelligence is.
- andsoitis 8mo agoI know you're arguing with someone else, but I think it is getting sidetracked. Whether or not LLMs are intelligent (I think they are more intelligent than a cat, for instance, but less intelligent than a human) isn't my argument. My argument is that complexity in and of itself doesn't yield intelligence. There's no proof of that. There are many things that are very very complex, but we would not put it on an intelligence scale.
- DiogenesKynikos 8mo agoWhen has anyone ever said that every complex thing is intelligent?
- PaulDavisThe1st 8mo agoIt was implicated in another comment.
- km3r 8mo agoI said that complexity can lead to intelligence, not that it must.
- PaulDavisThe1st 8mo agoTo return to an analogy I used a couple of days ago ... birds can fly, planes can fly, ergo they are both flying things ... but they fly in completely different ways. So on the one hand (visible behavior) they are similar (or even the same), and on the other (physical mechanism) they are not similar at all. Which one of these comparisons you want to use depends on context. The same seems entirely possible for current LLMs. On the one hand they do something that visibly seems to to be the same as something humans do, but on the other it is possible that the way they do it entirely different. Just as with the bird/plane comparison, this has some implications when you start to dig deeper into capabilities (e.g. planes cannot fly anywhere near as slowly as birds, and birds cannot fly as fast as planes; birds have dramatically more maneuverability than planes, etc. etc). So are LLMs intelligent in the same way humans are? Depends on your purpose in asking that question. Planes fly, but they are not birds.
- km3r 8mo agoI said "intelligence can emerge" not that it will.
- DiogenesKynikos 8mo agoBut in the case of both biological and computer neurons, it is an empirical fact that complexity has led to intelligence.