197
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 61 points 1 week ago

Did someone not know this like, pretty much from day one?

Not the idiot executives that blew all their budget on AI and made up for it with mass layoffs - the people interested in it. Was that not clear that there was no “reasoning” going on?

[-] A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world -5 points 6 days ago

Seriously, I've seen 100x more headlines like this than people claiming LLMs can reason. Either they don't understand, or think we don't understand what "artificial" means.

[-] khalid_salad@awful.systems 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Well, two responses I have seen to the claim that LLMs are not reasoning are:

  1. we are all just stochastic parrots lmao
  2. maybe intelligence is an emergent ability that will show up eventually (disregard the inability to falsify this and the categorical nonsense that is our definition of "emergent").

So I think this research is useful as a response to these, although I think "fuck off, promptfondler" is pretty good too.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago

“Language is a virus from outer space”

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 28 points 1 week ago

there’s a lot of people (especially here, but not only here) who have had the insight to see this being the case, but there’s also been a lot of boosters and promptfondlers (ie. people with a vested interest) putting out claims that their precious word vomit machines are actually thinking

so while this may confirm a known doubt, rigorous scientific testing (and disproving) of the claims is nonetheless a good thing

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 16 points 1 week ago

A lot of people still don't, from what I can gather from some of the comments on "AI" topics. Especially the ones that skew the other way with its "AI" hysteria is often an invite from people who know fuck all about how the tech works. "Nudifier" or otherwise generative images or explicit chats with bots that portray real or underage people being the most common topics that attract emotionally loaded but highly uninformed demands and outrage. Frankly, the whole "AI" topic in the media is so massively overblown on both fronts, but I guess it is good for traffic and nuance is dead anyway.

load more comments (36 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago

We suspect this research is likely part of why Apple pulled out of the recent OpenAI funding round at the last minute. 

Perhaps the AI bros “think” by guessing the next word and hoping it’s convincing. They certainly argue like it.

🔥

[-] V0ldek@awful.systems 17 points 1 week ago

This has been said multiple times but I don't think it's possible to internalize.

The VC/MBA class thinks all communication can be distilled into saying the precise string of words that triggers the stochastically desired response in the consumer. Conveying ideas or information is not the point. This is why ChatGPT seems like the holy grail to them, it effortlessly* generates mountains of corporate slop that carry no actual meaning. It's all form and no substance, because those people -- their entire existence, the essence of their cursed dark souls -- has no substance.

  • batteries not included
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2024
197 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1337 readers
140 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS