It is evident that it has intelligence, it outputs intelligent responses usually adequate to its input, even if it’s badly phrased. What it doesn’t have is sentience, conscience, and a learning loop.
To anyone who interacts with it? Would you deny that a program automate mental labor in the same way that a sawmill automates manual labor? Isn’t that some degree of intelligence?
Now, we have very imperfect LLMs who nevertheless can be instructed not with program code, but actual natural language, and they react accordingly. Isn’t that also intelligence? Computers that understood natural language was the realm of science fiction just five years ago.
I get it that people hate LLMs, both because how idiots use them, and how corporations push them everywhere; but not recognizing the intelligence in those programs is naive at best.
I’m pretty sure AI is objectively smarter today than it was 5 years ago.
Since LLMs literally can’t learn, no. They’re just increasingly tweaked to seem even more convincing.
How can something with no intelligence be smarter?
It is evident that it has intelligence, it outputs intelligent responses usually adequate to its input, even if it’s badly phrased. What it doesn’t have is sentience, conscience, and a learning loop.
Evident to whom exactly?
To anyone who interacts with it? Would you deny that a program automate mental labor in the same way that a sawmill automates manual labor? Isn’t that some degree of intelligence?
Now, we have very imperfect LLMs who nevertheless can be instructed not with program code, but actual natural language, and they react accordingly. Isn’t that also intelligence? Computers that understood natural language was the realm of science fiction just five years ago.
I get it that people hate LLMs, both because how idiots use them, and how corporations push them everywhere; but not recognizing the intelligence in those programs is naive at best.
No, none of that is intelligence. By any definition.
I have deep concerns as to the competence of anyone who interacts with these LLMs and hallucinates that they are intelligent.
There’s better integration with all sorts of other sources of truth beyond the LLM training, which makes it seem smarter.
Objectively + smarter, huh.
It is not alive and cannot really think, so I doubt it’s smarter. It likely contains a bit more knowledge and a better interconnected network for it
Whether said knowledge is of better quality than 5 years ago is up for debate though.
Actually it just appears smarter because people are objectively dumber than they were 5 years ago. “AI” is actually stagnate.