this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
421 points (98.4% liked)

Science Memes

11399 readers
745 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
421
vines of the animal kingdom (mander.xyz)
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
53 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Ai (as in current LLM's and the like) does not think. It predicts what word sounds right based on what we humans have written. It cannot make up thoughts or original concepts, synthesize info, etc. Being able to string sentences together based on probability is not necessarily intelligence or consciousness

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

So you're saying it's dumber than this worm? Wowzers, that's a hardline stance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It’s arguable whether the worm has intelligence of any kind, after all it wouldn’t even need it.Neither the worm or AI has any intelligence to compare because they don’t really think at all

AI isn’t called AI because it can think. AI is just a tech buzzword for predictive algorithms

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No, they both have intelligence. Intelligence is the ability to process information. A pocket calculator has intelligence. A domino computer has intelligence. Settlers of Catan has intelligence - the rules contain an algorithm for determining who wins.

What you're doing is deifying intelligence. You're making it into a bigger thing than it is. You're setting "Intelligence" apart from normal everyday information processing that even an abacus can do. The problem with that practice is that now you have no word to describe the ability to process information.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You do have a word to define that: the ability to process information. Defining intelligence in such a broad way makes the distinction practically meaningless. You cannot tell me with a straight face that you and I have the same intelligence as the phone in our pockets; there is a clear distinction between how we parse information and how a phone does.

I honestly don’t see what the main argument of all of this was anymore. If you were arguing that AI has intelligence and can think like us, and that we should treat it that way, then I guess we should emancipate every kind of predictive algorithm while we’re at it. Autocorrect has been oppressed for too long!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You do have a word to define that: the ability to process information

That's not a word, that's a phrase. A long one too. And it's the definition of intelligence.

You cannot tell me with a straight face that you and I have the same intelligence as the phone in our pockets

Good thing drag didn't say that. Drag said the phone in your pocket has intelligence. You added the part about it being the same intelligence as us. Don't do that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I guess you are right in that it is a phrase rather than one word. The point that I was trying to say is that oversimplifying what defines intelligence makes the distinction useless. There is a use in defining the difference between a phone computing numbers and our ability to think and I probably should’ve explained it like that

On an unrelated note, I keep seeing you refer to someone called drag. Is this you but in the 3rd person? Are there more than one dragon rider?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago

Drag uses person independent neopronouns. Drag's pronoun is inflected and conjugated the same way in all grammatical persons.

And drag disagrees that there's a singular distinction to be made between humans and worms. There's a spectrum of difference. Every improvement is an incremental leap. We got here over a billion years of evolution. It didn't happen all at once. Setting ourselves apart from the rest of nature disconnects us and damages our empathy. Human supremacy is the reason we eat meat. Drag is a vegan because drag values all intelligent lifeforms.

Also, did you know soy is capable of acting to defend itself? When aphids eat soy, it releases a chemical that smells delicious to ladybugs. The ladybugs come to check it out, and find a yummy aphid lunch. With the aphids eaten, the soy is safe. Nature is so cool. And you can call drag a hippie if you like.

[–] skulblaka 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Well, yes, it is. It doesn't meet the minimum definition for sentience, let alone intelligence. You may as well be upset with how poorly we treat rocks.

Actually now that I think about it, you are upset with how we treat rocks. Computer chips are just silicon shot full of lightning and an AI is a function of its chips. We could eventually reach a point where we've created a true thinking AI on this substrate but we are so hilariously far away from even the beginnings of that, right now, that using it as a talking point is silly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

And you think an earthworm is sentient. WTF.