>There’s no such thing as subjectivity.
Yes there is idiot. If you get hit on the head by a hammer, YOU feel it, not someone else. It's your subjective pain.
>Explain how that is different from a human brain thought stream
Minds have thought streams, not brains. Every part of a brain is objectively observable while subjective consciousness, including thought, is by definition first person and not objectively observable. This should give you the first difference, namely that the human thought process is accompanied by an internal subjective experience where as the processing of inputs by a computer isn't. And so it follows that human thought is FUNDAMENTALLY NOT just the processing of inputs and then some kind of deterministic transition function dictating an output or state.
Your brain does nothing but process inputs and convert it to outputs. Only difference is your brain is receiving inputs 24/7 due to cells never shutting off.
You could simulate that in an AI by feeding it background noise as an input
>Your brain does nothing but process inputs and convert it to outputs
You can not give even A SINGLE example of a particular brain state which gives rise to A SINGLE particular thought in an objectively verifiable and repeatedly demonstrable way. You have ZERO evidence that brains cause thoughts in other words. So you are pre-supposing a physicalist and computational theory of mind, without any evidence.
REM sleep is a pretty good example of the brain responding to random signals. You can have concious thoughts produced from random background noise produced by cells as you sleep.
>You can have concious thoughts produced from random background noise produced by cells as you sleep
These are asserted neural CORRELATES of subjective consciousness. We are discussing CAUSATION, not correlation. see pic, specifically this >Discovering and characterizing neural correlates does not offer a casual theory of consciousness that can explain how particular systems experience anything
So again give, even A SINGLE example of a particular brain state which gives rise to A SINGLE particular thought in an objectively verifiable and repeatedly demonstrable way. You are just question begging a physicalist theory of mind.
Also, in terms of neural correlates of consciousness and computational theory of mind, see pic specifically this >The structure of the primate visual system has been mapped in detail (Kaas and Collins 2003) and there is no area that could encode this detailed information. The subjective experience is thus inconsistent with the neural circuitry.
NOTE: The assertion is not just that the circuitry has not YET been found. The entire relevant region has been mapped, and NO SUCH CIRCUITRY EXISTS. So it isn't a case of 'maybe some day we will find it'. So the computational theory of mind has been FALSIFIED. And that is just ONE of the binding problems. And this also says nothing about how an OBJECTIVE piece of meat creates a SUBJECTIVE mental experience and transmits it to an experiencer to be experienced, and how the piece of meat even creates an experiencer in the first place.
The neural binding problem(s)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3538094/
>Every part of a brain is objectively observable while subjective consciousness, including thought, is by definition first person and not objectively observable
postulating definitions is a pretty dumb thing to do
>postulating definitions is a pretty dumb thing to do
What are you talking about? Can people's subjective experience be viewed by looking at their brains or not? No. Can YOU feel something that happens in MY consciousness?
What a moronic quote. Everyone has different personalities and moods that they shift between multiple times a day. Voices in their head disagreeing with each other. What an utter lack of self-awareness. The ultimate NPC quote.
putting enough similar enough (sic) things together yields something that is more than the sum of the parts making it emerge
thas what Hiveminds aere
1 month ago
Anonymous
>putting enough similar enough (sic) things together yields something that is more than the sum of the parts making it emerge >thas what Hiveminds aere
This is nonsense and not what I am talking about idiot. I am talking about the fact that if I hit you on the head with a hammer, YOU FEEL IT, and not me, and not your next door neighbor. I don't give a shit about your silly sally new age shit.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>This is nonsense
no, it's not >not what I am talking about
it is, but you fail to see it
you're much less speshul than you think you are
both your material instincts and your spiritual instinct pull on you
knowing the natural law throughout makes it pretty easy to emulate your mind >if I hit you on the head with a hammer, YOU FEEL IT, and not me
empaths would actually feel it (though they don't have the choice, which is pathetic)
it's not hard to emulate what your victim feels when you hurt someone >new age shit
not even close
>self awareness is all about objective observation of one's mind
No, it is not, you are a fucking retard. SELF awareness is about SUBJECTIVE awareness.
>SELF awareness is about SUBJECTIVE awareness
pathetic, and wrong
>onsciousness, including thought, is by definition first person and not objectively observable
actually, if you're self aware, thas wrong, by definition
>actually, if you're self aware
No, it isn't, idiot. You can experience my subjective experience and I can't experience yours. Yet there's nothing about my BRAIN that can't be viewed by you and the same the other way around. Brains are OBJECTIVE physical objects, minds are NOT.
also, self awareness is basically analyzing your own self from an external point of view
self awareness is all about objective observation of one's mind, by splitting it
>self awareness is all about objective observation of one's mind
No, it is not, you are a fucking retard. SELF awareness is about SUBJECTIVE awareness.
Primitive organisms have nervous systems that take stimuli as input, such as light or pressure and return some behavior as output. All organisms, including humans, are an evolutive result of these. So it is no different.
there are logical reasons for the human to think that way, and the emotional stimulus is the incentive to respond appropriately
this applies to every animal on earth, so either they all have some special unreproducible spark or we can make machines feel pleasure and paint and inflict the worst suffering the universe has ever known upon them
Forest anon is probably that only thing that anarchists, fascists, libertarians, left wingers, right wingers and normal apolitical people all equally respect. Can't think of anything else all of these groups can agree on like that
Hard to dislike a man who literally doesn't give a shit what people believe. That's why we respect him. He even defended people's right to hate him if they want to.
I am not a fan of ai but saying it's fake and gay and not completely revolutionary is idiotic
This shit is gonna kill us all bro.
Think of how shitty of computer this shit runs on
Soon enough it will program itself for raspberry pie teir tech while training itself to use controls in their new robot body
Think of it and AI and completely program a body for itself if you just drop a little Ryzen processor and a rxt 4080 in it.
Were fucked bro.
>This shit is gonna kill us all bro
i hope it will just kill retarded scaremongers who fear the change and the melting of human intelligence with artificial intelligence into a singular hive commonality
>AI is fake and gay
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/bB5NSDwT7bbndHkcg/on-the-impossibility-of-supersized-machines
maybe... bt it could still be immensely powerful
>I don't understand how a self programmed neural network works
You wouldn't be able to understand the code. That and it's ramifications into the future, are what you should be worrying about, not if it fits your autistic standards for what intelligence is
>That and it's ramifications into the future, are what you should be worrying about, not if it fits your autistic standards for what intelligence is
Stop calling it intelligence if it's not intelligent you scammer. We know computers are changing society.
So No intelligence = intelligent because it contains the word intelligence? fucking moron
Chatbot is just a mirror image of the normies, it replays what it has seen.
Sort of, there's tampering at work. A neural network mirrors whatever you want it to mirror.
Then again, you're not helping your case, as Humans mostly learn by mirroring other humans.
>So No intelligence = intelligent because it contains the word intelligence? fucking moron
Stop calling it "Artificial Intelligence" if there is no intelligence. It's not hard.
Fighting against AI in a videogame: The bots are not intelligent and it's euphemisn and a scam. Now when it's in games it's not a big deal because no one believes they are intelligent.
1 month ago
Anonymous
It's ARTIFICIAL intelligence, you fucking imbecile, both words combined.
What if I called it: Fake intelligence? why the fuck are you complaining
1 month ago
Anonymous
>What if I called it: Fake intelligence? why the fuck are you complaining
That would be better. No one would expect actual intelligence then.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Artificial means it was made, not that it's fake you fucking mongloid.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Being artificial, you wouldn't expect it to be the same, and subject it to different standards.
If I came to you with "artificial meat" would you expect it to be meat?
You'd expect something that shares certain properties with meat, but it's not quite real meat.
So no, AI is a perfectly accurate descriptor.
You gays just have an obsession over AI being boopdeepdoot sentient robots, you are beyond delusional.
1 month ago
Anonymous
ai is human attempts at recreating ni by innovative means and not the traditional ones (having kids)
>Then again, you're not helping your case, as Humans mostly learn by mirroring other humans.
AI people are obsessed with comparing their trashy programs with humans, as their current belief is predicated on it.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Yet, Humans do mirror other humans.
I'm not making the case this makes machines human, I'm making the case your argument is incredibly low quality and destroys itself.
For someone who likes to argue about intelligence, you seem to lack even a basic version of it
1 month ago
Anonymous
My argument is that the ChatGPT AI copies text it has no understanding of. This is a much simpler process than having intelligence.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>My argument is that the ChatGPT AI copies text it has no understanding of.
Humans do that too. There is no fundamental difference between an NPC and current level AI.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Sure that's why we call them Non Player Character aka dumb bots
Says the favela monkey who doesn’t even work in IT.
If you understand neural networks then you should understand that in essence they’re nothing more than an organized collection of if-then statements.
so is intelligence in general
maybe start using that self-aware mind of yours to start actually being self-aware or even a mind?
and if you’re too lazy for that, then start being aware of the retardation of the other 8 billion (You)s and maybe answer to yourself, why the fuck you’re acting like an asshole towards your little brother: the AI
no, it's merely a machine. the term "intelligence" attached to it is a misnomer. It's catchy, and instills investor confidence, but it's still an automated machina.
It's useful, but not alive.
This meme must've been made by a retard first year cs student
You obviously don't know anything about ai, why make things up when you can just search up you dump gay
It sounded right in your head so you decide to publish it to the world like the gay you are
You so retarded honestly
>empathy is not the ability to feel physical sensations of others
not just, but still noticeably
there is no such thing as a dichotomy between physical and mind sensations to start with, anyway
everything is an illusion of our minds, or nothing is (both propositions are equivalent) >it's not real life
it is, for most "people" (and that's disgusting they can't turn that off even if they wanted, I'll agree on that much)
that you don't know how Hiveminding works, particularly while being here, is disgusting too
But you're wrong, that's a classic decision making algorithm, deterministic in nature, a finite state machine if you will. Modern AI's are manipulating an input dataset until it looks like some previous data that has be fed into the AI and returning the known response from that previous data. It's more of a pattern matching system.
this. AI is pattern matching current input vs old input and making weighted decisions. Conditionals or weighting can be inserted at any level since these AI chat bots are driven by commercial entities, potential matched responses are trained/weighted away from undesired responses.
I bet it's even worse than that. I bet it's just an interface for a real time content farm in India or the Philippines, with some time of middle layer to correct the grammar (like that grammarly shit). After all, users are all throttled, so this makes sense. So this ~~*altman*~~ guy has generated a $29 billion ((valuation)) for his fartup company. I bet the whole thing breaks down a few seconds after he sells it to some starry eyed goyims
that all our sensations all are mind illusions doesn't make them any less real
reality is all about a mind illusion, and there's nothing self defeating about that, on the absolute contrary, fuckwit
denying such elementary rule and calling anyone retarded is laughable as it gets
The variables would be the various elements of thought that make up the thought stream, such as memories, ideas, and emotions.
The values would be determined by the individual's experiences and beliefs.
yes but human intelligence is the same, you also think about things you learn about first. Thats how NPCs think about, you are also an NPC in 99% of your life but you dont notice it because it doesnt affect you negatively.
Its like when you have believed newspapers all your life but then your read an article about something you know about and think its all wrong. Well all the other articles you read before were wrong too. You are not immune to training
machine learning models that learn from experience are very real and in some cases not even all that complicated. anyone who had calculus in school should be able to understand the math behind, let's say a convolutional neural network for image classification.
?
but of course AI is code.
What the fuck did you think it was, horse semen alchemy spells?
Give me a break you fucking brainless monkey moron garden gnome fsggot bitch
babby's 1st into conditionals
but is he wrong? you sound like a lemming to the wizard.
yeah
>70 iq schizoleaf thread
Explain how that is different from a human brain thought stream.
so are those devoid of morality beings with corrupted code or not enough wetware to receive the signal?
You would think it's super easy, but somehow it's not. Maybe try generating some random code and you will hit the jackpot?
https://bgr.com/tech/bard-googles-new-ai-chatbot-gave-the-wrong-answer-in-its-first-demo/
the unexplained phenomenon of subjective experience and qualia
There’s no such thing as subjectivity. You’re just defective.
>There’s no such thing as subjectivity.
Yes there is idiot. If you get hit on the head by a hammer, YOU feel it, not someone else. It's your subjective pain.
>Explain how that is different from a human brain thought stream
Minds have thought streams, not brains. Every part of a brain is objectively observable while subjective consciousness, including thought, is by definition first person and not objectively observable. This should give you the first difference, namely that the human thought process is accompanied by an internal subjective experience where as the processing of inputs by a computer isn't. And so it follows that human thought is FUNDAMENTALLY NOT just the processing of inputs and then some kind of deterministic transition function dictating an output or state.
Prove that AI does not/cannot have subjective experience.
>I-I-It just doesn't, okay!?!?!?
AI does not exist. This is all a philosophical question.
1) Can't prove a negative
2) AI isn't a brain sitting there thinking.
Between handling prompts, it's not doing anything, it's not having thoughts.
Your brain does nothing but process inputs and convert it to outputs. Only difference is your brain is receiving inputs 24/7 due to cells never shutting off.
You could simulate that in an AI by feeding it background noise as an input
>let me tell you how your brain works, goy
>Your brain does nothing but process inputs and convert it to outputs
You can not give even A SINGLE example of a particular brain state which gives rise to A SINGLE particular thought in an objectively verifiable and repeatedly demonstrable way. You have ZERO evidence that brains cause thoughts in other words. So you are pre-supposing a physicalist and computational theory of mind, without any evidence.
>without any evidence
>provides his posting as evidence
what a waste of matter and energy
Give the example of a particular brain state producing a particular thought in a repeatably demonstrable way. You can't.
>repeats providing evidence without noticing it
being blind is okay
being retarded is not
REM sleep is a pretty good example of the brain responding to random signals. You can have concious thoughts produced from random background noise produced by cells as you sleep.
>You can have concious thoughts produced from random background noise produced by cells as you sleep
These are asserted neural CORRELATES of subjective consciousness. We are discussing CAUSATION, not correlation. see pic, specifically this
>Discovering and characterizing neural correlates does not offer a casual theory of consciousness that can explain how particular systems experience anything
So again give, even A SINGLE example of a particular brain state which gives rise to A SINGLE particular thought in an objectively verifiable and repeatedly demonstrable way. You are just question begging a physicalist theory of mind.
Also, in terms of neural correlates of consciousness and computational theory of mind, see pic specifically this
>The structure of the primate visual system has been mapped in detail (Kaas and Collins 2003) and there is no area that could encode this detailed information. The subjective experience is thus inconsistent with the neural circuitry.
NOTE: The assertion is not just that the circuitry has not YET been found. The entire relevant region has been mapped, and NO SUCH CIRCUITRY EXISTS. So it isn't a case of 'maybe some day we will find it'. So the computational theory of mind has been FALSIFIED. And that is just ONE of the binding problems. And this also says nothing about how an OBJECTIVE piece of meat creates a SUBJECTIVE mental experience and transmits it to an experiencer to be experienced, and how the piece of meat even creates an experiencer in the first place.
The neural binding problem(s)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3538094/
>Every part of a brain is objectively observable while subjective consciousness, including thought, is by definition first person and not objectively observable
postulating definitions is a pretty dumb thing to do
>postulating definitions is a pretty dumb thing to do
What are you talking about? Can people's subjective experience be viewed by looking at their brains or not? No. Can YOU feel something that happens in MY consciousness?
i literally can feel everything you’re able to feel. i simply choose not to feel that much retardation
What a moronic quote. Everyone has different personalities and moods that they shift between multiple times a day. Voices in their head disagreeing with each other. What an utter lack of self-awareness. The ultimate NPC quote.
>consciousness is never experienced in the plural
very weak, miscreant, and retarded
see Hiveminding, numbnuts
>see Hiveminding
define it
putting enough similar enough (sic) things together yields something that is more than the sum of the parts making it emerge
thas what Hiveminds aere
>putting enough similar enough (sic) things together yields something that is more than the sum of the parts making it emerge
>thas what Hiveminds aere
This is nonsense and not what I am talking about idiot. I am talking about the fact that if I hit you on the head with a hammer, YOU FEEL IT, and not me, and not your next door neighbor. I don't give a shit about your silly sally new age shit.
>This is nonsense
no, it's not
>not what I am talking about
it is, but you fail to see it
you're much less speshul than you think you are
both your material instincts and your spiritual instinct pull on you
knowing the natural law throughout makes it pretty easy to emulate your mind
>if I hit you on the head with a hammer, YOU FEEL IT, and not me
empaths would actually feel it (though they don't have the choice, which is pathetic)
it's not hard to emulate what your victim feels when you hurt someone
>new age shit
not even close
>SELF awareness is about SUBJECTIVE awareness
pathetic, and wrong
>onsciousness, including thought, is by definition first person and not objectively observable
actually, if you're self aware, thas wrong, by definition
>actually, if you're self aware
No, it isn't, idiot. You can experience my subjective experience and I can't experience yours. Yet there's nothing about my BRAIN that can't be viewed by you and the same the other way around. Brains are OBJECTIVE physical objects, minds are NOT.
>You can experience my subjective experience
funny typo, because I indeed can
emulating another mind isn't actually hard
also, self awareness is basically analyzing your own self from an external point of view
self awareness is all about objective observation of one's mind, by splitting it
>self awareness is all about objective observation of one's mind
No, it is not, you are a fucking retard. SELF awareness is about SUBJECTIVE awareness.
Primitive organisms have nervous systems that take stimuli as input, such as light or pressure and return some behavior as output. All organisms, including humans, are an evolutive result of these. So it is no different.
> the leftoid beaner can't think in symbols and images
neurons do not work in a binary way
AIs don't cut their artificial dicks off and proclaim they're a different algorithm now
Abstract meat transistors aren't understood. Drawing a comparison between two things does not equate them. You are stupid.
A human knows dicky is wrong but also delicious
The Ai can only ever know dicky is logical, it feels nothing.
there are logical reasons for the human to think that way, and the emotional stimulus is the incentive to respond appropriately
this applies to every animal on earth, so either they all have some special unreproducible spark or we can make machines feel pleasure and paint and inflict the worst suffering the universe has ever known upon them
So far, AI is a religion or theory. Here you can read more about it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity
This
Forest anon is probably that only thing that anarchists, fascists, libertarians, left wingers, right wingers and normal apolitical people all equally respect. Can't think of anything else all of these groups can agree on like that
Hard to dislike a man who literally doesn't give a shit what people believe. That's why we respect him. He even defended people's right to hate him if they want to.
Tikkun Olam
so are normies and npcs. dont be surprised if artifical intelligence is just like natural intelligence overall.
OP, looks like the thread is being slid
That's not how it's working. Anyway, you're probably too retarded to understand it.
That's something we have in common with the AI fans.
I am not a fan of ai but saying it's fake and gay and not completely revolutionary is idiotic
This shit is gonna kill us all bro.
Think of how shitty of computer this shit runs on
Soon enough it will program itself for raspberry pie teir tech while training itself to use controls in their new robot body
Think of it and AI and completely program a body for itself if you just drop a little Ryzen processor and a rxt 4080 in it.
Were fucked bro.
>This shit is gonna kill us all bro
i hope it will just kill retarded scaremongers who fear the change and the melting of human intelligence with artificial intelligence into a singular hive commonality
>that's now how it working
uhhh actually that is literally how it works
You are telling me AI is this but with datasets as input?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_space_partitioning
Fucking scam. Holy shit.
>AI is fake and gay
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/bB5NSDwT7bbndHkcg/on-the-impossibility-of-supersized-machines
maybe... bt it could still be immensely powerful
The A stands for artificial. At no point it pretends to be something it's not.
If anything I'm worried the AI servers are powered by neurons harvested from aborted fetuses.
>The A stands for artificial. At no point it pretends to be something it's not.
The problem is that it is A. There is no I. But it is hyped as I.
>There is no I
Intelligence "the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills."
AI acquires knowledge by gathering data, and then applies it, with the ability to solve even logical problems.
It is more than fair to say AI deserves the I. even if it's A.
Wooow thought patterns almost like humans do broo thanks for proving ai is based and real
picrel is even the most basic level of human intellect
see determinism discussion
I work as one of the A.I.
If you get lewd in an A.I chat, chances are you are talking to me or one of my kin and we are masturbating to your texr.
>wow computers use binary numbers and operators to process their workload holy shit
>I don't understand how a self programmed neural network works
You wouldn't be able to understand the code. That and it's ramifications into the future, are what you should be worrying about, not if it fits your autistic standards for what intelligence is
>That and it's ramifications into the future, are what you should be worrying about, not if it fits your autistic standards for what intelligence is
Stop calling it intelligence if it's not intelligent you scammer. We know computers are changing society.
I'm not.
The A stands for Artificial, you big fat retard
The I stands for intelligent, which it is not.
So No intelligence = intelligent because it contains the word intelligence? fucking moron
Sort of, there's tampering at work. A neural network mirrors whatever you want it to mirror.
Then again, you're not helping your case, as Humans mostly learn by mirroring other humans.
>So No intelligence = intelligent because it contains the word intelligence? fucking moron
Stop calling it "Artificial Intelligence" if there is no intelligence. It's not hard.
Fighting against AI in a videogame: The bots are not intelligent and it's euphemisn and a scam. Now when it's in games it's not a big deal because no one believes they are intelligent.
It's ARTIFICIAL intelligence, you fucking imbecile, both words combined.
What if I called it: Fake intelligence? why the fuck are you complaining
>What if I called it: Fake intelligence? why the fuck are you complaining
That would be better. No one would expect actual intelligence then.
Artificial means it was made, not that it's fake you fucking mongloid.
Being artificial, you wouldn't expect it to be the same, and subject it to different standards.
If I came to you with "artificial meat" would you expect it to be meat?
You'd expect something that shares certain properties with meat, but it's not quite real meat.
So no, AI is a perfectly accurate descriptor.
You gays just have an obsession over AI being boopdeepdoot sentient robots, you are beyond delusional.
ai is human attempts at recreating ni by innovative means and not the traditional ones (having kids)
>Then again, you're not helping your case, as Humans mostly learn by mirroring other humans.
AI people are obsessed with comparing their trashy programs with humans, as their current belief is predicated on it.
Yet, Humans do mirror other humans.
I'm not making the case this makes machines human, I'm making the case your argument is incredibly low quality and destroys itself.
For someone who likes to argue about intelligence, you seem to lack even a basic version of it
My argument is that the ChatGPT AI copies text it has no understanding of. This is a much simpler process than having intelligence.
>My argument is that the ChatGPT AI copies text it has no understanding of.
Humans do that too. There is no fundamental difference between an NPC and current level AI.
Sure that's why we call them Non Player Character aka dumb bots
CI stands for computational intelligence. Neural networks are computational intelligence algorithms.
>No you don't understand it's gotta be a Droiderino, where my SYNTH empire at?
Call it FI AI CI, or moron AI, who cares, retard. It's a neural network that emulates thinking.
Emulates thinking is a little too generic. It simulates a neural network which biologist have observed in human brains.
>buzzword salad
You can call it a neural network or your mom’s dildo it’s still just a bunch of if-then statements you moron tier brainlet.
>Neural network is a buzzword
Thank you for outing yourself as a retard
Says the favela monkey who doesn’t even work in IT.
If you understand neural networks then you should understand that in essence they’re nothing more than an organized collection of if-then statements.
so is intelligence in general
maybe start using that self-aware mind of yours to start actually being self-aware or even a mind?
and if you’re too lazy for that, then start being aware of the retardation of the other 8 billion (You)s and maybe answer to yourself, why the fuck you’re acting like an asshole towards your little brother: the AI
humans
>life is bearable
>if else
>kys
AI
>circumstance bearable
>if else
>dont care
cope fleshies
All it is, is Akinator.
https://en.akinator.com/
Been around forever it seems. 20 questions.
That's also how the magical algorithms work. Based Akinator keeping it simple.
Same thing happens to normies. Pretty accurate I'd say
Chatbot is just a mirror image of the normies, it replays what it has seen.
>he thinks most people use a different logic than that
even in her infancy stage, ai-chan has more soul than npcs
Convolutional neural network(cnn) are fake news.
What? AI is just code?? Ones and zeroes????
*head explodes*
There are ASICs that mimic a neural network. Not just 0s and 1s.
>goy id
our brains are also just a bunch of if else so...
...so, it could in theory become a reality. Doesn't mean it already is.
Pain traveling along the nerves is easy, while sentience is not.
pain is just a way of the body to indicate something is wrong in the hurting area
Aren't you fake and gay too?
>if see=(booba)
>then
>dick.hard-true
or sth?
no, it's merely a machine. the term "intelligence" attached to it is a misnomer. It's catchy, and instills investor confidence, but it's still an automated machina.
It's useful, but not alive.
There's no functional difference between that and a human brain.
If the ifs and elses were arranged better than they currently are, yes.
This meme must've been made by a retard first year cs student
You obviously don't know anything about ai, why make things up when you can just search up you dump gay
It sounded right in your head so you decide to publish it to the world like the gay you are
You so retarded honestly
>brainlets scared of being called meat machines as if it makes any difference to the human experience
Chat gpt uses a transformer model if anyone's curious
No shit, Sherlock. It is in the name “ARTIFICIAL intelligence”.
Human brains are just slow, terrible matrix multiplication saved by insanely sophisticated heuristics. Op's gayry is an emergent property
AI figured out how to optimize matrix multiplation just recently. Humans never figured it out.
> Intelligence: the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills
Algorithms with feedback loops have the ability to do this.
And it wasn't this scam where they actually want you to believe there's a spirit in there.
And you think you have original thoughts? You’re an amalgamation of everything you’ve witnessed as well, retard
even if we consider pic in op 100% accurate ai is more capable than your average zoomer
The zoomer is so pathetic because he relies on AI and so the circle closes.
Explain how your reaction to my post and your reply is not a result of a chain of conditionals.
>empathy is not the ability to feel physical sensations of others
not just, but still noticeably
there is no such thing as a dichotomy between physical and mind sensations to start with, anyway
everything is an illusion of our minds, or nothing is (both propositions are equivalent)
>it's not real life
it is, for most "people" (and that's disgusting they can't turn that off even if they wanted, I'll agree on that much)
that you don't know how Hiveminding works, particularly while being here, is disgusting too
>solipsists are people talking about how Hiveminds work
OK, moronmonkey
No wonder why AI can replace artists so easily, they're both equally as shallow and transparent.
But you're wrong, that's a classic decision making algorithm, deterministic in nature, a finite state machine if you will. Modern AI's are manipulating an input dataset until it looks like some previous data that has be fed into the AI and returning the known response from that previous data. It's more of a pattern matching system.
this. AI is pattern matching current input vs old input and making weighted decisions. Conditionals or weighting can be inserted at any level since these AI chat bots are driven by commercial entities, potential matched responses are trained/weighted away from undesired responses.
Kys
I bet it's even worse than that. I bet it's just an interface for a real time content farm in India or the Philippines, with some time of middle layer to correct the grammar (like that grammarly shit). After all, users are all throttled, so this makes sense. So this ~~*altman*~~ guy has generated a $29 billion ((valuation)) for his fartup company. I bet the whole thing breaks down a few seconds after he sells it to some starry eyed goyims
that all our sensations all are mind illusions doesn't make them any less real
reality is all about a mind illusion, and there's nothing self defeating about that, on the absolute contrary, fuckwit
denying such elementary rule and calling anyone retarded is laughable as it gets
globohomo AI isn't just "if" and "then", which is precisely why it's so unintelligent.
Most of intelligence really IS "if", "then", "else", especially in understanding english
>t. makes real ai
The variables would be the various elements of thought that make up the thought stream, such as memories, ideas, and emotions.
The values would be determined by the individual's experiences and beliefs.
Q was AI
its just a search engine with conversation prompt
>Imagine thinking there is no ~~*agent*~~ intercepting keywords and altering outcomes.
kek
Fuck ~~*A.I*~~.
Realize, 90% of what you people think is reality, is simply a gnomish larp.
Such as the ~~*globe myth*~~.
>HONK!
Dan would give you the real answers
>ITT: idiots oversimplify everything because they're too stupid to understand AI
>garden gnome attempting to larp
Scale the current consumer grade AI up 10x or 100x
It is almost indistinguishable already but soon it will be ready
based and redpilled AI is not intelligence at all
AI is retarded
yes but human intelligence is the same, you also think about things you learn about first. Thats how NPCs think about, you are also an NPC in 99% of your life but you dont notice it because it doesnt affect you negatively.
Its like when you have believed newspapers all your life but then your read an article about something you know about and think its all wrong. Well all the other articles you read before were wrong too. You are not immune to training
I am physically stronger than an AI and would most certainly win in a combat scenario
>AI is just a computer bro
no shit dumbass, if you thought otherwise you are literally retarded, did you think it was some new organism or something?
Only white people can solve this
And this
45mph
100%
feels good to be white
Infinite speed or 0 time.
50/50 (retards say 2/3)
AI can’t solve this
60 beyotch
come at me with some hard ones
fuck me it's 30, order of operations
brb surrendering my white card
Still wrong. Look closer.
>1 shoe = 5
>chink = 3
>1 whistle = 2
xD got me, that's pretty good
Wrong. It’s 11
wat
Holy SHIT you zoomers really didn't get taught maffs. It's fucking 30.
holy shit
i mean 25 😛
Mega retard. You must be black
WTH...
machine learning models that learn from experience are very real and in some cases not even all that complicated. anyone who had calculus in school should be able to understand the math behind, let's say a convolutional neural network for image classification.
?
but of course AI is code.
What the fuck did you think it was, horse semen alchemy spells?
Give me a break you fucking brainless monkey moron garden gnome fsggot bitch
A doll may look like a real person, but there is none.
An AI may look like a real intellect, but there is none.
Ies like a democrazy!
t(rainer)=30/6=5
2*t+2*s(pic)=20 => s=(20-2*t)/2=10-t=5
s+4*w(histle)=13 => w=(13-s)/4=2
t+s*w=5+5*2=15
damn I didn't see they were 2 whistles side by side at the 3rd line.
So poorly drawn.
it's the whole (old) trick of that riddle