The technology is definitely impressive, but some people are jumping the gun by assuming more human-like characteristics in AI than it actually has. It’s not actually able to understand the concepts behind the patterns that it matches.
AI personhood is only selectively used as an argument to justify how their creators feed copyrighted work into it, but even they treat it as a tool, not like something that could potentially achieve consciousness.
So all you do is create phrases based on things you’ve read in the past and recognizing similar interactions between other people and recreating them? 🤔
ITT: People describing the core component of human consciousness, pattern recognition, as not a big deal because it’s code and not a brain.
The technology is definitely impressive, but some people are jumping the gun by assuming more human-like characteristics in AI than it actually has. It’s not actually able to understand the concepts behind the patterns that it matches.
AI personhood is only selectively used as an argument to justify how their creators feed copyrighted work into it, but even they treat it as a tool, not like something that could potentially achieve consciousness.
So all you do is create phrases based on things you’ve read in the past and recognizing similar interactions between other people and recreating them? 🤔
No we also transfer generic material to similar looking (but not too similar looking) people and then teach those new people the pattern matching.
My point: Reductionism just isn’t useful when discussing intelligence.
Man… I must be smart as heck to be able to come up with my own thoughts then…
Idk man, I’m pretty sure I can find all of those words in a dictionary.
As opposed to what, exactly?