zlacker

[return to "Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI"]
1. candid+gJ[view] [source] 2023-05-16 15:11:36
>>vforgi+(OP)
I'm sad that we've lost the battle with calling these things AI. LLMs aren't AI, and I don't think they're even a path towards AI.
◧◩
2. a13o+5R[view] [source] 2023-05-16 15:43:32
>>candid+gJ
I started at this perspective, but nobody could agree on the definition of the A, or the I; and also the G. So it wasn't a really rigorous technical term to begin with.

Now that it's been corraled by sci-fi and marketers, we are free to come up with new metaphors for algorithms that reliably replace human effort. Metaphors which don't smuggle in all our ignorance about intelligence and personhood. I ended up feeling pretty happy about that.

◧◩◪
3. kelsey+MX[view] [source] 2023-05-16 16:07:20
>>a13o+5R
I've come to the same conclusion. AGI(and each separately) is better understood as a epistemological problem in the domain of social ontology rather than a category bestowable by AI/ML practitioners.

The reality is that our labeling of something as artificial, general, or intelligent is better understood as a social fact than a scientific fact - even if purely the role of operationalization of each of these is a free parameter in their respective groundings which makes it near useless when taking them as "scientifically" measurably qualities. Any scientist who assumes an operationalization without admitting such isn't doing science - they may as well be astrology at that point.

[go to top]