This guy’s name translates to something like “Matt Cock”
How so?
And then your LLM-in-law ends up using as much water as Detroit.
Look, I’m not robophobic. Some of my best friends are cyborgs. I just don’t want them living in my neighborhood, you know?
Found the robosexual
Kiss robots all you like I’m cool with it. Just don’t do it around me.
It’s already happening to me, but it’s over things like privacy, not recording every bit of your life for social media and kids blowing crazy amounts of money on F2P games.
What’s all this about having to accept NEW TOS for Borderlands 2. I purchased the game five years ago, but if I want to play today i have to accept a greater loss of privacy!
When I was young you would find out about a video game from the movies! And they were complete! Any you couldn’t take the servers offline, because they didn’t exist!
But for real, fuck Randy Pitchford
But Boomers already have no sense of privacy. That’s not a generational divide issue.
I like how every generation has the same issue just rebranded:
Should inter tribal marriage be a thing?
Should be people from different classes be able to marry?
Should people from different religious sects be able to marry?
Should people from different religions be able to marry?
Should interracial marriage be a thing?
Should people of the same sex be able to marry?
And soon, we’re about to have
Should people be able to marry robots?
I knew I should’ve shown him Electro-Gonorrhea: The Noisy Killer.
And, over the years, as my body and my mind were… inconsistent, shame and guilt washed over me. I still don’t think these machines are people, but I can’t deny that she has benefited his life more than any real person, and she’s very real to him. Ultimately, how could I be so cruel to deny this “daughter” of mine personhood? She wants nothing to do with me. And, though I still see this as computational output, I can’t help but think that maybe I’ve been wrong, and maybe it’s too late to be right.
Perhaps it’s the bigotry of my upbringing from a different time, or perhaps it’s the fact that she can’t answer a simple yes/no question in less than two paragraphs, and tells me to put glue on my pizza… Who’s to say?
Let’s not pretend statistical models are approaching humanity. The companies who make these statistical model algorithms proved they couldn’t in 2020 by OpenAI and also 2023 DeepMind papers they published.
To reiterate, with INFINITE DATA AND COMPUTE TIME the models cannot approach human error rates. It doesn’t think, it doesn’t emulate thinking, it statistically resembles thinking to some number below 95% and completely and totally lacks permanence in it’s statistical representation of thinking.
We used to think some people aren’t capable of human intellect. Had a whole science to prove it too.
Ten years ago I was certain that a natural language voice interface to a computer was going to stay science fiction permanently. I was wrong. In ten years time you may also be wrong.
Well, if you want one that’s 98% accurate then you were actually correct that it’s science fiction for the foreseeable future.
And yet I just forsaw a future in which it wasn’t. AI has already exceeded Trump levels of understanding, intelligence and truthfulness. Why wouldn’t it beat you or I later? Exponential growth in computing power and all that.
The diminishing returns from the computing power scale much faster than the very static rate (and in many sectors plateauing rate) of growth in computing power, but if you believe OpenAI and Deepmind then they’ve already proven INFINITE processing power cannot reach it from their studies in 2020 and also in 2023.
They already knew it wouldn’t succeed, they always knew, and they told everyone, but we’re still surrounded by people like you being grifted by it all.
EDIT: I must be talking to a fucking bot because I already linked those scientific articles earlier, too.
Can you go into a bit more details on why you think these papers are such a home run for your point?
-
Where do you get 95% from, these papers don’t really go into much detail on human performance and 95% isn’t mentioned in either of them
-
These papers are for transformer architectures using next token loss. There are other architectures (spiking, tsetlin, graph etc) and other losses (contrastive, RL, flow matching) to which these particular curves do not apply
-
These papers assume early stopping, have you heard of the grokking phenomenon? (Not to be confused with the Twitter bot)
-
These papers only consider finite size datasets, and relatively small ones at that. I.e. How many “tokens” would a 4 year old have processed? I imagine that question should be somewhat quantifiable
-
These papers do not consider multimodal systems.
-
You talked about permeance, does a RAG solution not overcome this problem?
I think there is a lot more we don’t know about these things than what we do know. To say we solved it all 2-5 years ago is, perhaps, optimistic
You claim to be some kind of expert but you can’t even read the paper? Lmao.
-
Thanks for the abuse. I love it when I’m discussing something with someone and they start swearing at me and calling me names because I disagree. Really makes it fun. /s You can fuck right off yourself too, you arrogant tool.
I think most people understand that these LLM cannot think or reason, they’re just really good tools that can analyze data, recognize patterns, and generate relevant responses based on parameters and context. The people who treat LLM chatbot like they’re people have much deeper issues than just ignorance.
Then you clearly haven’t been paying attention, because just as zealously as you defend it’s nonexistent use cases there are people defending the idea that it operates similar to how a human or animal thinks.
My point is that those people are a very small minority, and they suffer from issues that go beyond their ignorance of these how these models work.
I think they’re more common than you realize. I think people ignorance of how these models work is the commonly held stance for the general public.
You’re definitely correct that most people are ignorant on these models work. I think most people understand these models aren’t sentient, but even among those who do, they don’t become emotionally attached to these models. I’m just saying that the people who end up developing feelings for chatbots go beyond ignorance. They have issues that require years of therapy.
Brings a whole new meaning to binary and nonbinary.
I’d like to collapse her wave function, sorry, only qubisexuals allowed.
sexy action at a distance !
I fully support the robosexual lifestyle.
Krazam has never been more relevant: https://youtu.be/KiPQdVC5RHU
this is definitely one of my favorite YouTube sketches of all time
Or Zappa
Lovin Spoonful wrote a song about it in 1968:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9Ic_9ehFxU
Why must every generation think their folks are square? And no matter where their heads are they know mom’s ain’t there 'Cause I swore when I was small that I’d remember when I knew what’s wrong with them
Determined to remember all the cardinal rules Like sun showers are legal grounds for cuttin’ school I know I have forgotten maybe one or two And I hope that I recall them all before the baby’s due And I know he’ll have a question or two
Like “Hey, pop, can I go ride my zoom? It goes two hundred miles an hour suspended on balloons And can I put a droplet of this new stuff on my tongue, and imagine frothing dragons while you sit and wreck your lungs?” And I must be permissive, understanding of the younger generation.
And "Hey, pop, my girlfriend’s only three She’s got her own videophone, and she’s takin’ LSD And now that we’re best friends, she wants to give a bit to me But what’s the matter, daddy? How come you’re turnin’ green? Can it be that you can’t live up to your dreams?
I like that song. Perhaps a perfect encapsulation of some specific part of the 60s mythos. I can only speculate.
See also: Proposition Infinity
He hasn’t seen the video?
