• salacious_coaster@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    21 hours ago

    The LLM peddlers seem to be going for that exact result. That’s why they’re calling it “AI”. Why is this surprising that non-technical people are falling for it?

    • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      That’s why they’re calling it “AI”.

      That’s not why. They’re calling it AI because it is AI. AI doesn’t mean sapient or conscious.

      Edit: look at this diagram if you’re still unsure:

      • laz@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        13 hours ago

        The I implies intelligence; of which there is none because it’s not sentient. It’s intentionally deceptive because it’s used as a marketing buzzword.

        • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 hours ago

          You might want to look up the definition of intelligence then.

          By literal definition, a flat worm has intelligence. It just didn’t have much of it. You’re using the colloquial definition of intelligence, which uses human intelligence as a baseline.

          I’ll leave this graphic here to help you visualize what I mean:

          • Nikelui@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Oh, yes. I forgot that LLM have creativity, abstract thinking and understanding. Thanks for the reminder. /s

            • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              It’s not a requirement to have all those things. Having just one is enough to meet the definition. Such as problem solving, which LLMs are capable of doing.

      • thehatfox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        In the general population it does. Most people are not using an academic definition of AI, they are using a definition formed from popular science fiction.

        • General_Effort@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          Yes, that’s the point. You’d think they could have, at least, looked into a dictionary at some point in the last 2 years. But nope, everyone else is wrong. A round of applause for the paragons of human intelligence.

        • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          You have that backwards. People are using the colloquial definition of AI.

          “Intelligence” is defined by a group of things like pattern recognition, ability to use tools, problem solving, etc. If one of those definitions are met then the thing in question can be said to have intelligence.

          A flat worm has intelligence, just very little of it. An object detection model has intelligence (pattern recognition) just not a lot of it. An LLM has more intelligence than a basic object detection model, but still far less than a human.

      • dissipatersshik@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        I’m not gonna lie, most people like you are afraid to entertain the idea of AI being conscious because it makes you look at your own consciousness as not being all that special or unique.

        Do you believe in spirits, souls, or god genes?

        • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 hours ago

          No, it’s because it isn’t conscious. An LLM is a static model (all our AI models are in fact). For something to be conscious or sapient it would require a neural net that can morph and adapt in real-time. Nothing currently can do that. Training and inference are completely separate modes. A real AGI would have to have the training and inference steps occurring at once and continuously.

          • dissipatersshik@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            That’s fine, but I was referring to AI as a concept and not just its current iteration or implementation.

            I agree that it’s not conscious now, but someday it could be.

            • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 hours ago

              That’s the same as arguing “life” is conscious, even though most life isn’t conscious or sapient.

              Some day there could be AI that’s conscious, and when it happens we will call that AI conscious. That still doesn’t make all other AI conscious.

              It’s such a weirdly binary viewpoint.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      You don’t have to be tech person to see through bullshit. Any person with mid level expertise can test the limits of the current LLM capabilities. It can’t provide consistently objectively correct outputs. It is still a useful tool though.

      • fishpen0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Mid level expertise in basically anything may be out of reach for younger gen z given the state of the education systems they lived through and the business practices that no longer prioritize training or continuing education. Assuming they can get hired at all when everyone is only hiring senior staff

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Education was always garbage though. It is designed to generate obidient wage slaves. Any person who wanted to get good always knew that self study is the only way to get leveled up.

          Your coworkers have no incentive to train you. This has also started since at least 1990s. Just how corpos operate.

          Point I am making, none of this is new or specific to gen z

          I guess covid is unique to them tho but covid didn’t make education shite, it just exposed it imho