zlacker

>>vforgi+(OP)
Imagine thinking that regression based function approximators are capable of anything other than fitting the data you give it. Then imagine willfully hyping up and scaring people who don't understand, and because it can predict words you take advantage of the human tendency to anthropomorphize, so it follows that it is something capable of generalized and adaptable intelligence.

Shame on all of the people involved in this: the people in these companies, the journalists who shovel shit (hope they get replaced real soon), researchers who should know better, and dementia ridden legislators.

So utterly predictable and slimy. All of those who are so gravely concerned about "alignment" in this context, give yourselves a pat on the back for hyping up science fiction stories and enabling regulatory capture.

>>srslac+I7
Imagine thinking that NAND gates are capable of anything other than basic logic.

>>chpatr+Cw
1. Explain why it is not possible for an incredibly large number of properly constructed NAND gates to think

2. Explain why it is possible for a large number of properly constructed neurons to think.

>>Eisens+gC
3. Explain the hard problem of consciousness.

Just because we don't understand how thinking works doesn't mean it doesn't work. LLMs have already shown the ability to use logic.

>>HDThor+ZO
To use logic, or to accurately spit out words in an order similar to their training data?

>>grumpl+3a2
To solve novel problems that do not exist in their training data. We can go as deep into philosophy of mind as you want here, but these systems are more than mere parrots. And we have no idea what it will take for them to take the next step since we don’t understand how we have ourselves.

>>HDThor+cd2
Where's that? Can you provide a reference?