• 0 Posts
  • 83 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle







  • LLMs have a perfect track record of doing exactly what they were designed to, take an input and create a plausible output that looks like it was written by a human. They just completely lack the part in the middle that properly understands what it gets as the input and makes sure the output is factually correct, because if it did have that then it wouldn’t be an LLM any more, it would be an AGI.
    The “artificial” in AI does also stand for the meaning of “fake” - something that looks and feels like it is intelligent, but actually isn’t.



  • They already did. AGI - artificial general intelligence.

    The thing is, AGI and AI are different things. Like your “LLMs aren’t real AI” thing , large language models are a type of machine learning model, and machine learning is a field of study in artificial intelligence.
    LLMs are AI. Search engines are AI. Recommendation algorithms are AI. Siri, Alexa, self driving cars, Midjourney, Elevenlabs, every single video game with computer players, they are all AI. Because the term “Artificial Intelligence” by itself is extremely loose, and includes the types of narrow AI all of those are.
    Which then get hit by the AI Effect, and become “just another thing computers can do now”, and therefore, “not AI”.




  • “It’s part of the history of the field of artificial intelligence that every time somebody figured out how to make a computer do something—play good checkers, solve simple but relatively informal problems—there was a chorus of critics to say, ‘that’s not thinking’”
    -Pamela McCorduck

    “AI is whatever hasn’t been done yet.”
    - Larry Tesler

    That’s the curse of the AI Effect.
    Nothing will ever be “an actual AI” until we cross the barrier to an actual human-like general artificial intelligence like Cortana from Halo, and even then people will claim it isn’t actually intelligent.







  • If the government spills this persons blood on the street, what do you get? The only thing that happens is that the punishment for fraud is now death.

    For this single case in an isolated vacuum, sure.

    Outside that you’d get no more fraud, and no more future fraud victims, because the punishment for it wouldn’t be worth the risk for anyone to try.
    Like I said, if the punishment for a parking violation was death, every single driver would make damn sure they would never, ever get one. Apply that for every “deliberate” crime and you end up with a society with essentially zero crime.
    Also a lot fewer people alive, but zero crime.

    Where the line goes is completely up to the justice system, how badly they want to prevent that type of crime, as it goes with every crime and punishment.


  • How does putting someone in jail or having them pay a fine to the government help “make the victims whole” any more than the death sentence would? If that was the point of the justice system, we would only have payments of wealth or services from criminals to victims and nothing else. In fact, I can think of quite a few crimes where the victims would love nothing more than the permission get to kill the criminal themselves in the most painful way possible.

    The number one priority of a justice system is to prevent crimes from happening in the first place - a task it has to constantly balance with freedom and human rights as the ultimate solution is to get rid of all criminals - and the more it wants to prevent a certain type of crime, the harsher the punishment for it should be. But as I said, usually the death penalty is used for crimes done by people who aren’t thinking about the consequences.

    If you use it as the threat for financial crime, soon you will have no more victims of financial crime, as the criminals are all either dead or too afraid to do it.

    Should it be used, for that or in the first place, that’s a completely different argument all together.