Most people cannot reconcile multiple points: 1. This is the most accessible way for humans to use technology ever. Natural language interaction has never been so good. 2. People familiar with the plumbing know this is not true intelligence - ThreadSky

sandipb.net • 22 days ago

Most people cannot reconcile multiple points:
1. This is the most accessible way for humans to use technology ever. Natural language interaction has never been so good.
2. People familiar with the plumbing know this is not true intelligence

Comments

technobaboo.bsky.social•20 days ago

it's broad approximate intelligence... like how digital cameras can see outside visible light but suck at dynamic range

naia.bsky.social•22 days ago

i am very familiar with the plumbing, and the only reasons i can think of why someone would think sota models are “not true intelligence” are
1. they’re misusing “intelligence” to mean something like sentience/consciousness/etc, or
2. they have a very human-centric conception of intelligence

naia.bsky.social•22 days ago

models fail at tasks that are trivial for humans because they are a different kind of intelligence than we are. that doesn’t make them unintelligent. we haven’t encountered intelligences this alien until now, so our perception of the breadth of intelligent mindspace is painfully limited

sandipb.net•22 days ago

I am not sure if it is a misuse or a philosophical disagreement. Intelligence without sensory inputs is difficult to imagine. Is creating images, music, video where a being is just seeing & rearranging numbers, truly a work of an intelligent being or just an extremely advanced instapot?

sandipb.net•22 days ago

Can an intelligence create art which it cannot perceive or appreciate?
As i said earlier, we are grappling with the definition of intelligence and by no means it is settled philosophy

naia.bsky.social•22 days ago

models can take sensory inputs now. all sota models are multimodal on at least one axis, some on multiple

i’m not going to try to get people to agree on a definition of intelligence, that would be fruitless and a waste of time. but any definition that excludes current models is a bad one

sandipb.net•22 days ago

Yeah that is a tough one. I can argue that there is having sensory inputs and actually “appreciating” senses is different from converting all sensory inputs to tokens & processing them the same way.
But am myself getting uncomfortable acknowledging how humans feel things 😀

naia.bsky.social•22 days ago

yeah ultimately we are just brains that process signals sent to us from sensory receptors, this is no conceptually different from sampling from prompts containing image tokens inserted by tool scaffolds

humans are not as special as we like to think we are 😅

sandipb.net•22 days ago

3. Regardless it is an astoundingly useful tool which has made a lot of previously tedious & practically impossible things possible
4. It is scary how little it takes for humans to consider something intelligent
5. It poses philosophical & existential questions about what we think intelligence is

gracekind.net•22 days ago

I read this as “people familiar with plumbing” which would also make sense!

sandipb.net•22 days ago

🤣

michiganarchist.bsky.social•21 days ago

don't forget the global ecocide

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply