And no movie referencing.
No, AI is just a probability based answer. So no intelligence, more like a parrot repeating popular information
That’s the problem.
Stupid people will just take the answer it spits out at face value, rather than being skeptical and calling it out on its lies. And even that can be a problem in of itself, because if you pressure it enough, it will eventually tell you want what you want to hear, no matter how wrong you are.
Removed by mod
Pretty unlikely considering only around ~3/4 of the world have internet access at all
Removed by mod
You were talking about “the people worldwide”. As for the second sentence, im not sure what you mean. In what way are the non-AI users not very different from AI users? Would they too ask an AI a question and then post the answer without checking?
Removed by mod
Oh dont worry i didnt actually think you believe that 90% of the world use AI. I just like to use flippant comments as a jumping-off point to provide actual numbers.
This doesnt work. AI users arent a subset of non-AI users. Thats like doing a medicinal study for dick-hard-pills on a few men and upon discovering it a success, declaring: now every man, woman and child will have a hard dick at their leisure.
Removed by mod
Well, the hypothetical idea isn’t that there’s one person or source of data that AI trains from, so hypothetically it’s supposed to learn from massive amounts of data coming from every source they can scrape.
While in the real world, the data that AI scrapes, often has stupid trolling comments.
My mom is a muffler while your dad blew a Smurf.
WTF you think AI will do when it realizes it’s mom might also be a muffler? Or a Smurf?
Hey! You’re saying that like being a smurf is a bad thing!! I’ll have you know my papa was a smurf! His name is…Grouchy Smurf!
Isn’t Al only as smart as the user putting in the information or commands?
The information that’s been “put in” is everything that bots have been able to scrape off of the internet, plus transcripts of a large quantity of YouTube videos, and a large dataset of pirated ebooks.
Terabytes of information, of varying quality.
Comparing intelligence implies that they’re creating their output by a comparable process, but that’s usually not true—they’re just finding patterns in other peoples’ output. The “big deal” is that they can create new output on the same patterns.
Human beings can do this too, though—it’s called “bullshitting”. The only difference with AI is that they’re so good at it they stumble onto the right answers more frequently than human bullshitters do.
They’re about as intelligent as the average user they were trained on. Maybe a tiny bit better because of tuning.
So, if you’re a programmer below average then LLMs might help you. Contrary, if you know what you’re doing then it’s a glorified (and often wrong) auto complete.
“AI” is fast and can access way more “facts” (memories) in an instant so it is often wrong way more quickly than a typical human would be.
What do you mean by “What’s the big deal”, OP? Elaborate…
I know what you’re getting at and I firmly believe that it is some love thermodynamics that you cannot get more information out of a system than you put into it.
It’s the same thing as the Covid subsidiaries. Covid subsidiaries were meant to keep people’s lives roughly similar during the pandemic. Businesses jizzed that money everywhere, and when they ran out, they fired a shitload of people, and blamed the subsidiaries; the actual fault was them jizzing money everywhere.
The AI can lead to some efficiency gains. Rich people are using it as an excuse to fire everybody
sorta, but they also use alot of databases, or online sites to scrape to form some of kind of coherent responses.
As smart for what? What does that mean
