Communist

Thank god they’re spending their time and resources on important things like this and not useless things like helping the poor!

It’s very good at small changes where you just can’t find the documentation, huge timesaver for such things.

I don’t think a single one of them believe that pattern prediction vs a human brain is meaningfully distinct, so this argument is worthless to them, it’d be like saying “nuh uh”, you’re not engaging with their beliefs, so, how would this help?

That’s from the 90’s, the more modern study shows a pretty big but gradual improvement

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969720374544

Nobody thinks they are the same, some wonder if it can be made to do equivalent things. Nobody needs to hear that what they are doing isn’t thought for the same reason nobody needs to hear that my computer isn’t actually thinking when it’s running slow.

I absolutely do, I’m just tired of this being posted every time someone says an AI is doing a thing, it’s overplayed, social discourse is obviously valuable, this just isn’t a valuable point to make.

People also wouldn’t do this if I said my slow computer was “thinking”.

Nobody does this when people say their computer is “thinking” when it’s running slow, I just don’t see the necessity of pointing this out every time the topic is brought up.

Nobody does this when people say their computer is “thinking” when it’s running slow, I just don’t see the necessity of pointing this out every time the topic is brought up.

What exactly is the harm in people being mislead in this way, as long as they still know about the risks of hallucination, in your eyes?

Those people won’t be convinced by this either.

It’s semantic because it’s really about language. Who cares that it’s not doing that like a human would, everyone who knows anything knows that and they were clearly using language in a less cumbersome way.

yes, everyone already knows what you’re saying, but it doesn’t matter and serves no purpose other than making it difficult to talk about their behaviours. The only workaround for this would be inventing new terms for when an ai does a behavior that resembles a human one. It’d be very cumbersome and add no value to any conversation.

to those not capable of understanding this or who disagree with you, what you’re saying wouldn’t convince them anyway, you’re just adding noise to these conversations.

It’s semantic because it’s really about language. Who cares that it’s not doing that like a human would, everyone who knows anything knows that and they were clearly using language in a less cumbersome way.

yes, everyone already knows what you’re saying, but it doesn’t matter and serves no purpose other than making it difficult to talk about their behaviours. The only workaround for this would be inventing new terms for when an ai does a behavior that resembles a human one. It’d be very cumbersome and add no value to any conversation.

This is a semantic argument, they obviously mean it emulates compassion better than a real human, and given its issue with sycophancy this is undoubtedly true, even to a fault. There’s no need to do this every time someone says an ai thinks or does some humany thing, everyone gets it, the language for saying these things is just clunky.