h0tbeef

What they mean is that dating apps have been enshitified to the point that most of them no longer function.

Is he talking about the environmental impact? Or is he just a fucking moron?

Don’t get me wrong, I love T2 (and the other ones too tbh). That’s fucking dumb tho. You’d think someone who works in tech would understand that the next-word guessing machine cannot become sentient (or even super intelligent, since it’s not actually intelligent to begin with, it’s a fucking computer program).

Would you also like a link to the English dictionary? Because it’s nowhere near correct

Well, that may very well be the most depressing comment I’ve ever read. You either need to work on your listening skills or find some new less-vacant people to interact with, because what you’re saying is insane

Upon reflecting I recognize now what the bad thing I said was. To be clear, I’m just an idiot and don’t think carefully enough about what I’m saying or typing until it’s already out of my head. I wasn’t trying to be discriminatory or exclusionary. I’m sorry everyone. I won’t bother you again.

We need to get rid of the surveillance architecture, but AI is only really dangerous to the cognitive abilities of those who use it. It literally cannot do things on its own. (I know there are a lot of articles who say it can, but they’re just lying to you for money).

Do you not interact with any other actual humans?

Why am I at work right now instead of defrauding rich dumbfucks?

Same Fuck these corporations, we don’t need them

The first sentence of this Wikipedia article literally immediately disqualifies LLMs, lmao “Sentience is the ability to experience feelings” Every sentence that follows continues to disqualify LLMs If you continue down to the section on “digital sentience” you will find other sentences that directly contradict your assertions, such as ‘Indeed, leading AI textbooks do not mention “sentience” at all.‘ It’s basically 100% agreed on that there are not currently any sentient computers, and there never has been. Do some people think that we might have them one day? Yes a very small number of the experts do, but they don’t know how to get there, and they aren’t close to being there now. The people calling their AI self aware and claiming that it took actions without their instructions (which is verifiably false) are lying to you for money.

SearXNG ftw

I’m sorry that you have trouble grasping so many basic concepts. Ironic of you to reference Dunning-Kruger. All animals are conscious as far as I’m aware, though the complexity of their thoughts may vary. They all act of their own volition, computers do not and cannot act of their own volition. You do not have to fully understand every aspect of consciousness in order to recognize that inanimate objects do not have it. “Will” is a component of consciousness, this is commonly understood. Computers are tools, they have no will. Computers calculate, they do not think, these are different operations. I am not oversimplifying things, you are under-thinking things that are already simple (likely due to cognitive offloading).

Perhaps I should seek a sponsorship with all of the mentions this thread has necessitated. Unfortunately I’m not currently on the payroll (or formerly for that matter, lol).

Yes. It would be bad enough if they just briefly touched me to grab my attention, but often they would keep their hand on my forearm while speaking to me.

Ok, this is actually just making me depressed at this point. You really only see your own autonomy as equivalent with a computer programs? Autonomous actually means “having the right of power or self government” which is not true of AI, or “undertaken or carried on without outside control”, which is also not true of AI. Power on your computer, load up your fully trained AI, and then wait for it to act without your direction. Did anything happen? No, because a human filled with information and experiences and feelings is actually WAY different than a computer program filled with data. For example, I did not prompt you to come on Lemmy and vocally fellate technofascists and their fuckware, you chose to do that of your own volition. That’s autonomy. The computer program won’t do that unless you direct it to. Edit - Just to be clear, because you’re not the only one pointing to “agents” as a sign of autonomy/intelligence/sentience -> An agent is literally a computer program that you prompt, which then talks to an LLM, and then does what the LLM tells it to do. It’s not acting autonomously, it’s following directions from the next-word-predictor machine, and those directions are built off of your original prompt.

They’re not escaping users control, they’re fucking computer programs. People are using them irresponsibly. If you accidentally run someone over in your car, the car didn’t “escape your control”, you just did a shitty job of controlling the car. It’s not the same thing. (Fuck “AI” btw)

That’s different than AI tho That’s an example of a computer being utilized in the way ut should be (with predictable outcomes

I’m not angry, you’re projecting, lmao The emotion I’m experiencing in all of these AI threads is disbelief and disappointment. It’s not a baby anymore once you’ve fed all of the training data into it. It’s not really a great metaphor. All of the words that you’re saying are “vague” are actually extremely well defined. Check it out. www.merriam-webster.com

Why would I pay them for something they didn’t do?

Because it might lie to you (and often does). It cannot admit when it’s wrong. It’s not a good teacher because it fundamentally doesn’t understand anything.

I can’t believe how many pro-AI arguments essentially boil down to “I do not understand words”. We have a very solid and explicit definition of what conscious means: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conscious#medi… The best neuroscientists in the world do not even fully understand the complicated intricacies of the workings of the human mind. We do understand 100% exactly how computers work. There is no comparison.

Actually I’m now realizing that I’ve seen a few of those happen (I’ve seen the smiling one a lot actually), and have become somewhat desensitized, so they fall into a category of “upsetting but not surprising”. I think the hand thing threw me for a bit of a loop because that’s some cartoon wolf shit

Fair enough, I appreciate the clarification. I would posit philosophically that the LLM cannot build off of the knowledge of others in the way that a human (like the mathematician) could, and so it is not capable of forming an original thought. When an LLM model is trained, it is left in a sort of static state of “knowledge”. The model does not have “compounding memory” the way humans do; When a human finishes their education (training) and begins their career they usually continue to learn and gain experience throughout the course of their career. An LLM doesn’t remember anything, not its experiences, not events that you tell it about, not the last time you prompted it. If you want to teach the LLM something new, you have to re-train the thing. It can’t learn on its own

I mostly agree with you, but AI cannot “act autonomously”. You prompt it, and it acts based off of that prompt. Think of it like doing the laundry: I load my clothes in and “prompt” the washing machine to do my laundry. When the washing machine switches from the rinse cycle to the spin cycle, it’s not acting autonomously, it’s continuing to execute my prompt. Is AI capable of doing something you didn’t expect it to do? Yes. Does that mean it’s acting autonomously? No. I would also argue that the “power” of LLMs is vastly overstated. A large part of that is for the exact reason you say tho, people with zero knowledge or skill are playing with fire; And when they get burned they blame the machinery, not the operator.

Dudes fucking do that?!? I used to be a bartender (I’m a cis-man), and I would get upset when a customer touched my forearm (both genders did this) What the fuck is wrong with people

I mean, I guess, but I’ve been extremely embarrassingly drunk many times in the past, and I’ve never attempted to kiss a stranger (or any unwilling party, for that matter) If someone loses that much of their inhibitions while drinking then they probably shouldn’t drink

Oh shit, I didn’t even realize Mapquest was still in the game

Fearmongering about the idea of a neural network gaining consciousness is basically like doing free advertising for AI companies lmao You are ascribing a power to them that they do not possess For the record, I think neural networks have a lot of useful applications; for example, radiological image recognition. The term “AI” basically has no meaning though, and is most commonly used to describe LLMs, a technology that has very few (if any) good real world applications.

I can assert that because I have what is known as RI (real intelligence). Sentience is defined extremely well, and explicitly; check out both definitions: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentience Go ahead and click on through to the root word and check out every definition of that word. www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient You could make such assertions yourself if you were to stop cognitive offloading and exercise your brain.

I can’t believe I have to keep explaining this to people, lmao First of all, this is a math equation. Math is what computers do, they are essentially really fucking good calculators. That math problem hadn’t been solved before, that’s true, however, if you actually read the excerpt you just shared, you’ll see that the equation was solved using preexisting theories and formulas. Ergo, humans had already manufactured every individual piece of the puzzle, and had used them in other contexts that the AI could be fed and then reuse. Saying that AI came up with the solution isn’t the full story. That’s like saying that AI created a shitty piece of slop art. It did no such thing, it plagiarized a bunch of work from other people and essentially made it into a collage. When MC Hammer (rather, his producer) sampled Rick James for “Can’t touch this”, did he become the bass player? No, that was still Rick James, they just took his song and altered it to make theirs.

LLMs cannot fulfill these definitions. Try to explain to me how an LLM could fit the definitions of “conscious” or “sentient”. If you understood how computers work and also had a firm grasp on the English language, you would understand that there is no way to use either of those words to accurately describe a computer program.

Look up “rationalists” and “zizians” It will quickly become clear to you that the dichotomy is caused by one side being completely off their fucking rockers.

My man, allow me to introduce you to the dictionary: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentience www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient Did you ask your AI what the definition of “sentience” was or something? Because something/someone is hallucinating.

An LLM cannot do that either. An LLM can only ever rearrange what is put into it and shit it back out. You’re never going to get any knowledge out of it that wasn’t previously fed into it (and even then it hallucinates and doesn’t know shit because it’s literally just code). We do not know how to make an AGI, ergo LLMs do not “know” how to make an AGI (and in fact, don’t actually know shit at all).

Well, one is a plausiblistic text generator, and the other can think

Think of it as a public service announcement. Judging by this comment thread, it’s a badly needed one.

They’re decent for translation, but also anathema to actually learning anything

It’s not possible the way they’re trying to do it, no question. You could make a flimsy argument that it would be possible in some way, but the way that they’ve chosen to approach it is 100% not viable.

Nah, Xavier sounds like some dork ass Gen Alpha kid I only recognize Amon-Ra and Allah

Actually it wouldn’t be able to understand shit because it’s an inanimate object.

No, my argument is that your conceptualization of sentience is incomplete.

I apologize, I have a bad habit of not reading the rules (or noticing which sub I’m in, I came in from the ‘All’ feed). I’ve just now read the rules, and it definitely says that only women can post, but it was less clear about if men would be welcome to comment (based on your comment it seems like maybe we’re not? [I have ASD, so I often need things spelled out for me explicitly, I’m not trying to be pedantic]) I’m sorry if I’m intruding, that was not my intention. If this is a safe space I’ll gladly see myself out.

So you prompt the AI to do a task, and then it does the task, and somehow you see this as an unprompted action? That actually completely proves my point, they don’t act unprompted. AI is dangerous in many contexts, especially the surveillance state they’re building with all the IR cameras and shit. It’s dangerous when evil people use it to evil ends, but that’s true of most anything. AI is not at all dangerous in the way you might imagine after watching Terminator 2.

One of the other many cartography companies can do it

Hey dude, thought you might find this interesting: mastodon.social/…/117233413705701198 Basically, remember that math equation that we were talking about AI ‘solving’? I said it used pre-existing formulas rather than coming up with a novel solution, and you said that’s how all math works? Well it turns out we were both wrong: A human solved the equation and published his work a few days before AI “solved” the equation. So it didn’t even use pre-existing formulas, it just wholesale stole the answer from someone with actual intelligence, lmao

If you ascribe any level of sentience or intelligence to a computer, you definitely feel much less dumb than you actually are.

Homie, you’re the one who cannot grasp the definition of several extremely common and well defined words (or their accompanying concepts) You are showing your ass

Or “don’t count on it” (because if you did you’d be counting for eternity) I’m sure there’s more I’m not thinking of right now… “Why don’t you wish in one hand and shit in the other, and see which one fills up first” … yeah, I like the chair one