“How can this be! What a cruel twist of fate… And isn’t it like 9PM!? Oh… fucking daylight savings!”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XQbPaBRvaJw&pp=ygUeQ2hhb3RpYyBnb29kIEJhcmJhZGlhbiB2c21waXJl

Wait is that today?

Did, did you follow me here from an argument you lost, call me pretentious, on a time travel joke, and attempt to correct my measurements on the speed of light with which can only be a grossly over simplified and wrong result for the speed of light?

Oh my god, that is precious! I’m saving this one. So did you want to ruin everyone else’s vibe here and get to answering for your self from that other thread? Or like take the L and move on?

Well not 299,792,458 meters per second. The time travel effect becomes more effective the slower you are from that

And time travel! But you have to drive real slow for it to work

“Do you like this picture of a frog”

Well that sounds like more people need to bear arms.

Are you telling me that if you remove the laugh track from red dwarf… you lose a comedy and gain a sci-fi/horror/drama?

“Functional” was the conditional that acknowledges the possibility of a totally deterministic existence, but dismisses it for what ever we actually perceive as agency, as to argue one way or the other is a distraction away from the topic and is wholly unnecessary.

Also: “However, many AI applications are not perceived as AI: "A lot of cutting edge AI has filtered into general applications, often without being called AI because once something becomes useful enough and common enough it’s [not labeled AI anymore]” -wikipedia

This should tell you that the term AI is commonly, improperly used to refer to computer actions when not properly understood. AI was coined by science fiction to do what science fiction does best, force humanity to question, and in this case the question what is consciousness. That is to say, a consciousness that was designed, and not self built out of the muck. If you argue that how its used determines its meaning, then fine everything from punchcard looms, video game bosses, to excel spread sheets are or have AI. And its designation becomes worthless. Once the magic fades these LLM’s will be as much an artificial intelligence as siri.

Hucksters sell magic, scientists and engineers provide solutions.

And finally i agree there is nothing “special” but there is a difference between large models and consciousness. If you leave an LLM open, and left alone, how long before it starts to create something, or does anything? You leave an animal or a human in a blank room long enough it will do something not related to direct survival.

It took someone to literally create a picture of a full wine glass in order for an “art” AI to take and generate one. This should tell you these do not have functioning concept of the subject matter. But are good enough at convincing people they do.

We have functional agency regardless of your stance on determinism in the same way that computers can obtain functional randomness when they are unable to generate a true random number. Artificial intelligence requires agency and spontaneity, and these are the lowest bars it must pass. And they do not pass these and the current path of their development can not pass these, no matter how updated their training set, or how bespoke their weights are.

these large models do not have “true” concepts over what they provide in the same way a book does not have a concept of the material they contain, no matter how fancy the index is

We have functional agency, regardless of your stance on the determinism. “AI” does not even reach that bar, and so far has no pathways to reach that with its current direction. Though that might be by design. But whether humanity wants an actual AI is a different discussion entirely. Either way these large models are not AI, they are just sold as such to make them seem more than they actually are.

Does “AI” have agency?

Maybe, still doesn’t mean that the label AI was ever warranted, nor that the ones who chose it had a product to sell. The point still stands. These systems do not display intelligence any more than a Rube Goldberg machine is a thinking agent.

The issue is AI is a buzz word to move product. The ones working on it call it an LLM, the one seeking buy-ins call it AI.

Wile labels change, its not great to dilute meaning because a corpo wants to sell some thing but wants a free ride on the collective zeitgeist. Hover boards went from a gravity defying skate board to a rebranded Segway without the handle that would burst into flames. But Segway 2.0 didn’t focus test with the kids well and here we are.

True but irrelevant.

You are needlessly combative.

if i have reason to doubt it, and that depends on how i feel the importance on the data i am working with, it gives me the source of its information. So i can verify it. Google is even worse at providing misinformation because it’s just a hose of information with a bunch of ads hidden amongst it, and people bidding for elevated results, and spam.

No matter what tool you use to harness the internet, it’s up to the user to parse that info.

I mean, its great finding me sources of information.

Could google do it? Not as good as it used too or as good as ai, but yes.

I also use it to format my brain storms.

Or where it’s located or what the name of the function i need.

Or if i want info on items i am looking to buy, like what the benefit of waxing my bike chain is over oils. That sort of thing

This is like the opposite of when people complain that when ever anyone tries to talk about women issues, men have to suddenly make it about them. I don’t know why this has to be a zero sum event here.

He’s badly arguing that since the artist saw, has knowledge of, and has recreated the art style using his brain, he’s no better then someone who uses AI to do the ‘same thing’

He can’t tell why it’s different and that’s to be expected of an ai prompter. It would take effort.

Having moments of solice is fine. Drowning out the suffering of others to its total exclusion to live your best life is wrong