Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
Just got hit with:
"But can you prove ChatGPT is *not* intelligent in the human sense?"
Oh my that old chestnut. 
I am not making a claim, I am merely rejecting somebody else's claim that ChatGPT is intelligent in the human sense.
The burden of proof is on whoever claims that ChatGPT is intelligent in the human sense. That proof would also need to be accompanied by a clear, unambiguous, testable definition of what "intelligent" means, that ideally includes humans but excludes calculators.
@rysiek 
I've written about this at length before, I'm starting to wonder if the tech bros have sentience themselves...
https://www.staygrounded.online/p/how-chatgpt-makes-the-statue-of-liberty
@dingemansemark oh man this is gold.
@rysiek @dingemansemark @JustinH
I mean, you jest, but...
When people say "LLMs don't really understand things; they just know how to string associated words together convincingly", my first reaction was "oh, you mean like most people?"
...and then you get to a field where what is rewarded most is not understanding anything at all, but sounding inspiring and leaderly?
Hell yeah.
....so....
...how long is it going to be before some of us get together and train an LLM to be a Visionary Tech Startup CEO...?
(Idle thought: Max Headroom giving a TED Talk)
@woozle @rysiek @dingemansemark @JustinH The whole sentience argument reminds me of the bear-proof trashcan problem. Either ChatGPT is sentient or Sam Altman isn't, you can't have it both ways.
@p4 ahaha, I had no clue about the Bear-Proof Trashcan Problem! Amazing, thank you for pointing it out.