It’s hard not to say “AI” when everybody else does too, but technically calling it AI is buying into the marketing. There is no intelligence there, and it’s not going to become sentient. It’s just statistics, and the danger they pose is primarily through the false sense of skill or fitness for purpose that people ascribe to them.

@Gargron Yup. They're not intelligence. They're not hallucinating. They're not making new connections.

They're data-center scale autocorrect.

@Gargron agreed. It's just LLMs, the professional nonsense generators

@Gargron
Nobody says #ArtificialSmartness.

Just sayin’

@Gargron

Maybe it should be consistently written as "AI" instead of as AI.

@Gargron funny I had this exact same exact conversation in my head yesterday about something in a paper I am writing. I decided to define the method as ML throughout and I will most def argue to keep it as such even if any reviewer/editor will suggest to me otherwise 😌

@Gargron well said. #AI is high throughput data integration, processing and repackaging.

@Gargron

It's another round of Wall Street hype by anti-democracy billionaires, no different than NFT's or cryptocurrency - just another scam.

@Gargron and sadly nobody will become more intelligent by using it

@Gargron still wonders about your main goal of that post?!

@Gargron It's another huge tech scam, like crypto...

@Gargron Then we can agree that at this stage AI safety is another trick of marketing.

@Gargron As usual, rms is telling the truth and nobody listens ;-)

"I can't foretell the future, but it is important to realize that ChatGPT is not artificial intelligence. It has no intelligence; it doesn't know anything and doesn't understand anything. It plays games with words to make plausible-sounding English text, but any statements made in it are liable to be false. It can't avoid that because it doesn't know what the words _mean_."

@Gargron
The deceit doesn't start there, but in the A. None of this is any more artificial than most of what surrounds us, certainly all of our software. It's automation. It's also, in most cases, inference. So Automated Inference.

The questions are what is being automated, who stands to benefit, who is at risk, and what are the guardrails around.

@Gargron That's not even all of the problem. As "AI" is a hype, they've started to call every shitty algorithm that is doing any kind of analysis and prediction "AI", no matter if machine learning is even involved in the process.

Concerning terminology, it's a nightmare.

@sibrosan @Gargron Or maybe A"I"?
It is definitely artificial. Just not intelligent.

@Elisa @Gargron it's possible to be more specific or "technically correct", with terms like LLM or neural net, depending on the context of course - I agree though! often I use "AI" in conversations for the sole purpose of putting on a heavily sarcastic tone, pausing, and padding the word with heavy air quotations. works wonders for my mental health 😏

@gpollara @Gargron

But, at some point, doesn't "high throughput data integration, processing, and repackaging" become indistinguishable from "conventional intelligence" though?

@Elisa suddenly thought it sounded like I was trying to "one up" you, so I want to say I like what you're doing, and just wanted to add my thought 😊

@shrikant @gpollara @Gargron Until such time as we figure out how the brain works, no. I don't think it is possible to do it using boolean logic.

@Gargron You can easily tell if people know what they are talking about. If they say "language model" they probably do, if they say "generative AI", they may, if they say "AI" they usually don't.