AI godfather Geoffrey Hinton: ‘We’re creating alien beings. I’m willing to be selfish and choose humans’

It’s so demoralising to perpetually witness apparently intelligent people be convinced that Algorithmic Iterators can in any way be mistaken as a form of intelligence. I’ve struggled for decades to relate to the world; but this recent, collective debasement of rationality has nearly obliterated the few remaining foundations suitable to build hope upon.

Define intelligence.

Comprehension, something LLMs are intrinsically incapable of demonstrating, let alone possessing.

I’m pretty sure comprehension was like the original success of LLMs, and the responses were a bit wonky. When was the last time an LLM failed to comprehend?

They never comprehend. They ingest information and find close approximations for responses, but they don’t comprehend any part of the process. If they did, they wouldn’t hallucinate complete bullshit answers and spit them out like they were fact

To be honest human spew bullshit all the time when they do not understand something. Or people are confidently incorrect all the time as they are remembering incorrectly. The amount of bullshitting is more a meter for intelligence, not something that discriminate between intelligence or the lack thereof.

You are anthropomorphizing LLMs: This is a mistake. They are not people and they do not think, reason, or feel. They are completely incapable of these things. Even calling it "AI" is misleading at best.

I am not. I want to understand what is the difference between “feeling” as result of electrochemical reactions in our brain and “feeling” as result of math performed on a numerical matrix. I am perfectly aware those are not the same, but the result may be similar, and what we care of the result determines the conclusions we can make.

You need to clearly explain what is thinking and what in the “thinking” process of LLM is not thinking. If you define “thinking” as electromechanical reactions in human brains then LLM is not thinking, but it is not a useful definition.

I don't need to explain shit, you're the one made the claims and didn't provide proof. The burden of proof is on you. We can (and should) dismiss your baseless unproven claims about "AI" outright.

Do you even know what a claim is?

they do not think, reason, or feel. They are completely incapable of these things.

This is a claim. You made a claim. My assertion that you need to substantiate your claim definitionally does not constitute a claim.

Bullshit: The claim was made without evidence, I dismissed baseless claim.

Not even close to being the same. Do YOU know what a claim is?

Please quote the claim I made you disputed, I will try to defend it or drop it.