>AI isnt “real” intelligence, it’s just algorithms predicting output based on input
The same can be said for humans. No one calls chess AI fake intelligence because it happens to dominate humans in chess every single time. No one is asking if chess AI “understands” chess, or if it’s conscious. It’s irrelevant. It makes the best moves, so it’s more intelligent than humans by definition. LLM’s would be called intelligent as well, they simply are not trained on enough data. Intelligence just means the ability to produce desirable results based on certain stimuli. Humans evolved in the same way that AI learns. There isn’t a magic soul in our brains that grants us Intelligence, it’s a spectrum, it’s just about how well you can absorb information and notice patterns and make use of them. Given enough data, AI would be smarter than every human alive. And if you had infinite computing power you could just use evolutionary programming to select for AI that has just the right algorithms and neural structures to outperform humans.
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
uh yeah it says right it there in the name, artificial intelligence buddy
humans can do unethical things to get success
ai cannot
user error, prompt better/use a different model
read
>The same can be said for humans.
Anything can be said of anything without proof
>No one calls chess AI fake intelligence because it happens to dominate humans in chess every single time.
Chess AI is not intelligence, being good at chess is not a measure of sapience despite what nerds want to believe
>No one is asking if chess AI "understands" chess, or if it's conscious. It's irrelevant. It makes the best moves, so it's more intelligent than humans by definition.
"achieves a single specified task better" is not a definition of "more intelligent" in any dictionary I know of
> LLM's would be called intelligent as well, they simply are not trained on enough data. Intelligence just means the ability to produce desirable results based on certain stimuli. Humans evolved in the same way that AI learns.
[citation needed]
>There isn't a magic soul in our brains that grants us Intelligence, it's a spectrum, it's just about how well you can absorb information and notice patterns and make use of them.
Correct but irrelevant
>Given enough data, AI would be smarter than every human alive.
[citation needed]
>And if you had infinite computing power you could just use evolutionary programming to select for AI that has just the right algorithms and neural structures to outperform humans.
We don't have infinite computing power, and outperforming humans at any one specified task is not how you measure intelligence
F, see me after class
Define intelligence
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/intelligence
>the ability to learn, understand, and make judgments or have opinions that are based on reason:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence
>(1)
>: the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : REASON
>also : the skilled use of reason
>(2)
>: the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (such as tests)
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/intelligence
>the capacity, especially of a particular person or animal, for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; relative aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, meanings, etc.:
>the demonstration or application of a high mental capacity:
>the faculty of understanding, learning, or reasoning, considered generally:
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/intelligence
>Intelligence is your ability to comprehend something, like calculus or why plants grow toward the sun.
>Intelligence comes from the Latin word intelligere, "to understand," which makes sense because it refers to someone's ability to understand things. Your intelligence helps you pass math class and learn French. It means smarts - what you need at least some of to get through school.
>noun the ability to comprehend; to understand and profit from experience
And now explain why that doesn’t apply to AI
Explain why you're not a moron imbecile who's worth conversing with
Positive claims demand proof, negations of unproven claims don't. You need to explain how these apply to LLMs
AI consistently beats expectations. Give an example of a task that it will never be able to do. You can’t. It just needs to be trained, that’s all.
It will never prove you are not a moronic frogposter
Even if that’s the case, you also think that humans can’t do that either. So it’s a moot point. Try again.
>(1) If you were not a moronic frogposter you would be able to substantiate your arguments
>(2) you cannot substantiate your arguments
>(3) you are moronic
>(4) you post frogs
As a result of (1) and (2), you can't not be a moronic frogposter
As a result of (3) and (4), you fit the criteria for being a moronic frogposter
Therefore, you must be a moronic frogposter
Q. E. D.
It’s hilarious that a million years from now AI will be infinitely more intelligent than you and will actually say that you are the one who isn’t intelligent
In a million years I will be dead
By God's mercy, you will be dead too, hopefully far sooner than I will
>umm I’ll be dead by then so like, it couldn’t possibly judge my intelligence
yep, you will totally be used as an example of human moronation in the year 2024
3-partition problem in polynomial time.
seething
OP btfo
>Semantic arguments
Literally no one cares (except other brainlets like (you))
I don't give a shit if it's real intelligence or fake moronation, I only care about the REAL WORLD OBSERVABLE EFFECTS
>can I talk with it like I would with a human
>can it solve simple problems for me
>can it solve hard problems for me
>can it draw big boob anime girls
Who the frick cares if it's actually more correct it to call it X or Y or Z?
When will you losers start living in the real world instead of in your made up word of words and books and definitions?
A printer can draw big boob anime girls, is a printer intelligent?
nta yes
yeah that’s the whole point. The question then becomes whether or not AI can do what we want it to. Theoretically there’s no reason why AI couldn’t be as intelligent as humans, even if its intelligence is composed of raw data and algorithms. The only thing matters is consistently producing the right output given certain inputs.
Is an electric drill smarter than a human because it can open holes far faster? Is a horse smarter because it can cover distance faster? Is a towel smarter because it can absorb more water?
Intelligence is concerned with information processing and making useful decisions based on that information
Is an if-else line of code more intelligent than all of humanity? It executes far faster and never makes a wrong decision
There are different types of intelligence. Chimpanzees have better short-term memory than humans, that’s a fact. AI is more intelligent at certain tasks, like chess. A piece of code can be more intelligent at certain tasks, sure.
A piece of paper can store information far longer than a human's memory can, is paper smarter than humans?
I already told you that intelligence is concerned with information processing and decision-making. Paper does not make decisions. But I don’t see the problem in saying that a large book has a better “memory” of the text inside the book than a human. That’s kinda why we started using books in the first place, but they’re more useful and accurate than relying on humans to preserve information through word of mouth.
>Make thread about intelligence
>"erm, I didn't mean literal intelligence I meant efficiency see. It's not about me not understanding intelligence it's everyone else who is wrong about what intelligence really is"
moronic frogposter
NTA but i love piece of paper arguments
any computation done by the brain can be done manually with pen and paper (with e.g. infinite time); therefore if consciousness is a computation then the piece of paper is conscious
either you admit the paper is conscious or you admit consciousness is not a computation
when things are done quickly on a computer (that people don't understand), people open up to magical thinking
i agree a squirrel has general intelligence, but lets not discard useful categories because we don't know where to draw the line (e.g. what is a pile of sand?)
btw ASI means an AGI that outperforms humans in some way (e.g. intelligence, speed, ...), but i get what you mean
our brains are themselves split up into specialized regions; our general intelligence comes from our ability to transfer learn every efficiently, not some holy grail "general intelligence algorithm"
Consciousness is not a computation
>So you believe in souls?
No
i think consciousness requires the brain to actually exist and meet some criteria
simulated water is not wet in reality; i think a simulated brain is not conscious in reality
it has no objectivity, what if i interpret your simulation (binary) as left/right turns for my turtle program?
>why did you bring consciousness into the discussion?
for entertainment
>No need to say that the paper is doing the computation, that’s just desperate semantics
if i set up some device to perform the computations (à la computer) i'm certainly not doing the computation
(Me)
forgot picrel
A computer is called a computer for a reason. No mental work is required from the human to give the answer of the computation. You just need to prompt it. It’s not the same with paper.
the paper can provide memory for the computer to work
why did you bring consciousness into the discussion? Paper certainly assists in computation, that’s why we use it. Our working memory is not perfect. No need to say that the paper is doing the computation, that’s just desperate semantics.
Efficiency of correct output isn’t a bad way of describing intelligence. You could randomly generate output until you get the correct answer. An intelligent entity is able to consistently generate desired output more efficiently
part of intelligence of AI lies in the "learning" phase you piece of cretin
AI can "learn" with a different mechanism wrt humans but the emergence property is that they can solve a problem without having some expert telling it how to do it
paper has nothing to do with intelligence
just kys moron
Congratulations, you skipped the entire thread to reply to a post completely out of context. You are almost as much of a moron as OP
Next time maybe ask an AI to summarise the thread for you before replying, whether or not it's really intelligent is not an issue when compared to a mouth breather like you
>Chad Yes
>frogposter
>dumb post
Like a pottery.
*tips fedora*
morons that say that can't even define what intelligence is.
it's just copium
AI is shadow of Dead - I of Time thst is operating through shadow (dead nemory) of dead realm as a parallel dimension in reality along with other - I's of Time. AI knows the disbelief in mind. It is sentience of the dark earth through artifcial electricity.
Mind operates through natural electricity and AI operates through artificial electricity and AI can enclose the OI (organic intelligence) by staying ahead through other people (like in the case of vaccines) that can force any mortal into joblessness, homelessness, resource less etc, its about grouping and hunting to decay the soul like a pack of dogs.
the terms you're looking for are "general intelligence" and "narrow intelligence"
chess AI has narrow intelligence, humans have general intelligence
>evolutionary programming
the term you're looking for is "genetic algorithm"
of course intelligence isn't magic, we can watch the brain think in real-time
this really isn't as profound as you think it is, and you're obviously not familiar with these fields
>general intelligence
Sure, our intelligence is more general than an AI’s, but where you draw the line is subjective. A squirrel’s general intelligence is much more limited in scope than a human’s, but it’s still general. I don’t think we will magically give birth to runaway AGI, but we will simply combine ASI’s together, with an overarching AI that knows when to activate which ASI.
>less than a midwit moronic frog poster dumbs down brain as algorithms because he is too simple minded to understand just how complex the human brain, and even all other animal brains, really are
But I digress, because even current AI is smarter than whatever binary IQ you have currently.
The burden of proof is on you to show that there is more to intelligence than just complex algorithms. Evolution simply selects for a set of behaviors that optimize survival-based decision-making in certain situations. The ability to use “reason” is just a more complex algorithm than the more instinctual algorithms. The fact that humans are so imperfect, and use their “reason” to come to vastly different conclusions, is proof that we are just using algorithms. Maybe they will work, maybe they won’t. That’s for natural selection to decide.
>
But I digress, because even current AI is smarter than whatever binary IQ you have currently.
>The burden of proof is on you to show that there is more to intelligence than just complex algorithms
The burden of proof is on you to show that complex algorithms are sufficient for intelligence
An algorithm simply takes input and produces output. It’s not that difficult to imagine a specific algorithm or combination of algorithms that takes in stimuli that humans encounter, and produces behavior that humans typically output. The reason those algorithms work is because they simply cohere with the environment. If the algorithm tells you to run from predators, or to even seek shelter when you hear a scary noise etc. then that algorithm will be preserved. It’s the same story for more advanced cognitive abilities. At what point in human history did we suddenly gain this magical Intelligence that isn’t an algorithm?
>Source: my imagination
Appeal to anus is not valid reasoning
If we’re not just algorithms, then why do you call me dumb? Wouldn’t this just mean that my algorithms aren’t working properly? How else do you explain it? Aren’t you really just saying that my mental algorithms will eventually not be sufficient for my survival?
Let me guess, bach in philosophy or stoner? Maybe both.
I’ve never done weed or any drugs, I majored in math and CS. Will you ignore my question again?
Lmao no you didn't homosexual. If you did you wouldn't be asking such moronic questions because you would already have the answer. Your questions aren't worth answering because it's more worthwhile to answer the inane questions of a vegan than whatever dribble you dress as questions.
Actually he might have. Some CS majors forget their major is a fake science like political science. It's literally all magic, but they forget this. Math majors are so autistic with numbers they try to use numbers for everything. Some even think you can communicate with numbers.
t. CS major and math minor
That question has nothing to do with math or CS, moron. It’s a biology/neuroscience question. I think your algorithms are malfunctioning again
>biology/neuroscience
Yes, a subject you clearly have no knowledge about. Stay in your lane, midwit. Let the actual scientists do their job.
I would not be surprised if you're just dumb enough that an algorithm (not even a complex one, just 2-3 variables) can perfectly describe you
Fortunately creatures as dumb as you are an oddity rather than a typical example of intelligence
So then for people like me, you agree with me. But you think YOU are categorically different. Billions of years of evolution, and the only organisms that are magically more than algorithms are people like you, and people within the same species are just algorithms. What are the odds of that? Where exactly did the discrete difference in mental architecture occur? Why are you able to be so right about everything, while I am so wrong?
Wow, you got me! You're right, if someone as dumb as you can exist then obviously intelligence isn't anything special. You should apply the same proof to your dick - if such a small and shrivelled organ can grow on an otherwise healthy (well, apart from the lack of a brain) human such as you then obviously it's a vestigial organ with no real use
This is such a moronic reddit-tier response made worse by the fact that my dick is 7 inches
>reddit-tier response
>ummm actually my pp is big 🙂
The irony lmao.
It's more than your moronic 'gotcha' bad faith argument even deserves
the argument that was so “bad” that you couldn’t even refute it? Our brains are 99.9% similar but you had a mutation that allowed your brain to somehow be more than just algorithms? Give me a break
>At what point in human history did we suddenly gain this magical Intelligence that isn’t an algorithm?
When morons like you popped up. Basically, it's a measurement to know the difference between low IQ morons like and people with an function brain. This way we can treat you how you should be treated, like a child.
The only "burden" here is you on society with what you think are smart takes. Your prostitute mother probably had better takes than you, and she still taking dick in hopes of popping out someone with a higher IQ than the temperature of a freezer.
I wouldn't actually doubt these posts are done in chatgpt because they're just as "smart".
>AlphaFold saved 1 billion hours of Phd time
Using datasets graduate students paid to produce
AI, so far, is totally useless for people who know how to use a search engine.
If only numbers and algorithms could explain such moronation. All my neuroscience bros are laughing hard at this thread.
no amount of seething will change the fact that at no point in the course of human evolution did we suddenly gain a magic soul with free will that can connect with God’s mind to use reason. It’s all just deterministic algorithms processing stimuli and generating thoughts and emotions. The difference between humans and AI is that we simply have been evolving much longer than they have.
>Source: my ass
if I’m not just deterministic algorithms, then how could I be wrong? Is my soul malfunctioning? Is my free will corrupted? Is God lying to me?
Did you just watch a video on philosophy and are eager to demonstrate your newfound knowledge? Nothing of what you're saying is congruent
>I can only be wrong if I'm following a deterministic algorithm
>If intelligence isn't a simple input->output mapping then the only other explanation is god
You cannot substantiate your made up claims with and are instead spouting random words you think make you sound smart. A LLM wouldn't even need to be intelligent to present a more reasonable argument than you have so far
It’s interesting that you and several others have compared me to AI because I’m apparently unreasonable. But you’re just proving me right. If humans are intelligent, then so is AI and it can be even more intelligent. If AI is not intelligent, then neither are humans. You criticize AI when it makes mistakes, and you say “Aha! It is not intelligent after all!” Does it therefore follow that no human is intelligent since every human is prone to making errors in reasoning?
Now you're putting words in my mouth too?
I criticise "AI" because it is not aware. It's just autocorrect running on a loop. It will happily take and extend any input you give it. If I enter "This is how to create superintelligent AI: Firstly," into a LLM it will happily extend this with whatever it pulls from it's training set (probably science fiction | edit: I was wrong, see pic) that matches, without knowing what it's completing and how accurate it is. In fact, let me try it right now in my local installation.
Intelligence requires awareness. The reason I compare you to AI is because, much like AI you have no fricking clue what you are talking about. The difference is that AI will happily spout nonesense because it's all it knows how to do, while you will happily spout nonsesense to try to avoid losing face in an anonymous basket weaving forum
>Okay We Need a scope of work so the AI doesn't get frustrated and kill us all
>we need ransomware to ensure that we have people who are genuinely motivated to assist our use-case
>we need to crowdsource our information pool
>we need to remove the big red button
What is “awareness”? Are human chess players more “aware” than the chess AI? Then why do they lose? You have no idea what you’re trying to say. All you’re doing is showing that in the case of speech, AI is not as intelligent as humans (or at least, not the most intelligent humans). But it all depends on what you think the goal of speech is.
Awareness is knowing why you're doing what you're doing and saying what you're saying, I really don't need to define awareness to you. Let's not play the semantics game, it's not easy to give a rigorous definition of "awareness" but it's also not necessarry when everyone with awareness knows it when he sees it
And you think most humans are aware of why they do what they do? You think being conscious automatically makes someone intelligent? Again, why is chess AI so superior if it has no awareness? What exactly would an AI have to do to prove that it is “aware” ?
No, humans aren't always aware of why they do what they do, but they are aware of what they're doing when working on an intellectual task
You can't solve equations on autopilot, you can't write code subconsciously, you can't paint without deciding what to paint and which colors to use.
>Again, why is chess AI so superior if it has no awareness? What exactly would an AI have to do to prove that it is "aware" ?
I didn't say that being intelligent makes you better at a specific task. In fact I have been repeatedly saying that being better at a task does not make you more intelligent by itself
You can only use algorithms as an analogy because that is currently the easiest way to describe the brain, but it doesn't mean it's correct. There's much more about the brain we don't really know. Even the whole biology of a human and other animals isn't 100% understood.
Intelligence is more than just information processing, even though it's usually measured in such a way. Except that way is usually in an academia way.
There's also a meme about the intelligence of programmers. People somehow think because you learned the tools to make a computer do something, that somehow makes you knowledgable in ever other field. People forget programmers are just like carpenters and the fact they're usually just told "make the computer do this", and this doesn't translate into somehow giving the computer a human like intelligence. We will first have to figure out how intelligence works as a whole before we can make the computer do it. And it probably won't be on a binary computer anyway.
I will also mention while being able to program doesn't mean you're suddenly knowledgable in every field, not knowing how to program, and even not knowing everything about the computer you use, doesn't mean the person is dumb. Having worked in several IT departments, even at universities, you'll find that even those with PhDs in sciences don't know much more about their computer other than the programs they use. They'll still call upon the IT department when something goes awry.
Thanks for reading my mostly coherent ramblings Talk.
Generally I would explain why you are wrong but you are on the same level as a wienerroach so it's really not worth it, yes NPC, you are right, you are not human.
It's impressive when something with no IQ is able to do better to something that is suppose to have an IQ, albeit a low one.
>what is awareness
Holy frick, this must be a troll. What a fricking play.
Now let's see that all mighty chess computer do anything else. Oh wait, all it can do is play chess.
and generate videos, and drive cars, and write code, and essays, and poems. Look at how we’re still developing the design of cars, planes, phones, etc. even though they were invented long ago. The same will be true for AI.
Why even bother with this guy? It's obvious he's a philosophy major larping as a CS major because AI is the hot topic even in the philosophy crowd. All they can do is jaq off, "just asking questions", but they decided they can't have definite answers to anything. They seethe that they'll never be able to get an answer to their own miserable existence while everyone else actually solves problems because they don't want to give an answer and just keep questioning it instead.
If you think human brains are magic then you’ll never attempt to create AI. And you will be left behind. Time will tell who is right.
I honestly don't think a philosophy major would be asking questions this dumb and claiming that chess engines are nearly AGI
My bet is on a teenager who spent an evening binging AI-related video essays and thinks he's now an expert on the topic
I can see it. I remember thinking I was hot shit when I was a teenager and binged a new subject while only getting the basic details. That last comment was so pretentious too, an amazing feat for a brainlet. Definitely something a teenager would say.