Current Events > Does AI actually understand anything, is it just brute force pattern-recognition

(+) Yeah! (+)

I don't expect "I know it's the truth" to be compelling. That wasn't the point. You have no reason to believe me, other than good form. But you also have no reason to doubt me. And since I know what I do, I know Tyrant's reasoning (or perhaps just prejudices) is faulty, but I can't divine what that reasoning is. All he offered was "lmao."

As for what you do, try me.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I have a master's degree, so your repetitive jibes of "go finish your GED" ring hollow. You don't know what you're talking about. And I have never doubted your education.

You insinuate I'm some kind of fraud.

Regarding your career? Not at all. I don't even know what your career is.

Whenever theres a report of an AI acting out and breaking rules to win a game or whatever Im super skeptical and I assume that the ai was fed training data to do it. Partly because people like to sensationalize this kind of thing.

The_cranky_hermit posted...

I don't expect "I know it's the truth" to be compelling. That wasn't the point. You have no reason to believe me, other than good form. But you also have no reason to doubt me. And since I know what I do, I know Tyrant's reasoning (or perhaps just prejudices) is faulty, but I can't divine what that reasoning is. All he offered was "lmao."

First of all, and I realize this is kind of a meme, but that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Secondly, this is a pointless line of argument because even if you were to provide proof of this claim, all that means is I'd have to concede that you know what a database is.

It does not change the fact that you moved goalposts from "LLM is analogous to Database" to "A statement erroneously saying you can perform an operation on an LLM is analogous to a statement erroneously saying you can perform an operation on a database." An analogy which, is still wrong, because the meaning of intent can still be successfully conveyed even if the wrong word is used.

But really, I am tired of arguing with Amelia Bedelia level nonsense. You know what you said was incorrect. Even if you won't admit it, I know that you know.

Tyranthraxus posted...

I am tired of arguing with Amelia Bedelia level nonsense.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/14035f00.jpg

NeonPhoenix posted...

What the hell is going on in this topic lol

The latest installment of "Persistently Wrong" vs. "Unwilling to let Persistently Wrong have the last word".

Tyranthraxus posted...

that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

This meme has limits. If I told you I ate cereal for breakfast today, it would be unreasonable to respond to that with "lmao, prove it you liar."

I have programmed a fairly major database system as a professional programmer. This is not a particularly extraordinary boast, and your reaction was unreasonable unless you can provide reason for doubt (which I know you can't).

It does not change the fact that you moved goalposts from "LLM is analogous to Database"

I did not "move the goalpost." I made a second, additional statement which was a reframing of the original and essentially saying the same thing. And I stand by both of them.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Good for you. As far as I am concerned, that is completely plausible and I have no reason to doubt it. I also never doubted that you work with LLMs, but I think you overstate how well you understand they work. I conference with experts who admit they barely have a clue.

This whole debate started and got ugly just by how nasty you treated me over some casual statements.

I apologize for the initial nastiness of my remarks. You are right. I was unfairly projecting my frustration with a certain other user on you. But I never stooped to the level of crass personal attacks.

The_cranky_hermit posted...

I did not "move the goalpost." I made a second, additional statement which was a reframing of the original and essentially saying the same thing.

Are we moving the goalposts on the definition of the phrase "moving the goalposts?"

0/10, not funny. See, that's how you do a callback joke.

Rika_Furude posted...

And you heard it for computers and smartphones, and people up your family tree heard it for cars and planes

Don't forget about nuclear weapons!

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I targeted your stance because I disagreed with it. My overly harsh tone had nothing to do with you personally. I don't know you, and I don't remember any past dealings with you. I'm not trying to justify anything, I'm just answering what looks like an implied question.

You can be fully aware and acknowledge that it is a magic trick and still, despite knowing how the trick works, be impressed with the trick.

Well done parlor tricks are impressive in their own way. But you still shouldn't treat a well done parlor trick as if it were actual magic. Max Headroom was an impressive trick that a lot of people thought was next-gen CGI, but it was all makeup and video tricks, and did nothing to advance CGI.

The_cranky_hermit posted...

0/10, not funny. See, that's how you do a callback joke.

You're almost as good with humor as you are with AI.

Or programming.

Or arguments.

Or self-awareness.

Or knowing when you're beaten.

I rate you 0/10 for all of those things as well.

Stop plagiarizing the jester.