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.
Saying "LLMs are intelligent because they can learn" is like saying "computer programs have legs because they can run."
"You can't prove human brains are different than LLMs!"
A human brain is a biological organ. An LLM is a probability distribution over sequences of words.
There are very few things that can be *more different* than human brains and LLMs.
@rysiek does anyone actually claim this, that you can't prove human brains are different from LLMs?
@peter_ellis yeah, basically you get some form of that whenever you debate anyone proposing that LLMs are intelligent. Sooner or later in the discussion they will reach for some form of that "argument".