@theadhocracy
Not at all. You can freely browse the web or ask a chat who coined the term and why. It will be an interesting read I can assure you and you will understand that ai is not meant to refer to a specific human level intelligence like you mean. It wouldn't make sense at that time anyway.
@Noisecolor @xvf17 @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @emilymbender Okay, literally my first reult:
"The term "artificial intelligence" was coined in 1956 at Dartmouth College by John McCarthy and colleagues to describe the new field of creating machines that could think and learn like humans."
So, it *means* "artificial", not "simulated". It covers inorganic "machines". And it references *thinking* and *learning*.
We can argue semantics on learning, but an LLM ticks 0 of those boxes.
@Noisecolor @xvf17 @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @emilymbender And just to head off "learning", yes genAI has roots on "machine learning". But the output, the LLM, does not learn "like a human". Some may have reinforcement algorithms, but all that's fundamentally doing is a loop: take the new data, run your previous "training" algorithm, update your output.
Humans learn through understanding and cognition. An LLM does not. Otherwise they'd be able to do simple calculus before they could write essays.
@theadhocracy
"Doesn't learn like a human": True. Doesn't matter. Learning is adapting based on data. LLMs do that. That's the definition.
"Just a loop": Human brains are also "just" electrical impulses. Mechanism doesn't negate capability.
"Calculus vs. Essays": Outdated. Modern models handle both. Training order is not intelligence limit.
@Noisecolor @xvf17 @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @emilymbender Yeah if you're just going to redefine words, then I guess there go possible way to help you understand why people use specific terms to mean things...
Like, I get that language evolves, but this is absurd 😂 "Learning is adapting based on data", sure if you want to argue that a model "learns", but that's not what anyone means or how any dictionary defines it.
Learning implies knowledge and understanding. And LLM cannot understand.
@theadhocracy @Noisecolor @xvf17 @emilymbender I am going to side with the extremely rude person here on the definition of learning, because it *does* have applicability in Machine Learning. It's a dual use word. It does *not* have the same implications in machine use as in humans, and the mechanism is different. But the term is applicable.
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @Noisecolor @xvf17 @emilymbender I can agree with that, but the term in this case was being used in a definition, specifically "machines that can learn like a human". That's why I was referencing it.
I did explicitly add a comment about how "learning" can be applied to algorithmic behaviour (ML etc.), but 1) that isn't the way the term is used in the definition of AI (scope is narrower), and 2) I don't agree that's enough to make the leap for LLMs to *intelligence*
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @Noisecolor @xvf17 @emilymbender But yeah, in this instance, I still think its a real stretch to claim that GenAI models **learn**. They may be born from reinforcement algorithms, and we may have adopted "learning" to describe aspects of that behaviour, but imo that is a marketing term.
Biological algorithms actually *learn* and modify their behaviour without oversight. So I'm not saying that ML is never learning. Just that I disagree that such a broad redefinition is okay
@theadhocracy
You are twisting and turning and doing mental gymnastics in order to get even an imaginary straw in which you can maybe be right.
While we have called ai romba robots for years without any issues form anyone.
And now some people developed a big problem with lmms. A very specific group of people that hate ai. Do you see it? So you see something not quite right with this situation?
@Noisecolor @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @xvf17 @emilymbender Speaking of strawmen... Yes, lots of people mocked and were openly concerned about using "AI" as marketing for smart home devices and tools like Roombas. Those are also not AI, no one in the industry thinks so, there's no gotcha here.
Plus, one of the big distinctions is that the general public didn't fall for it in the same way, partially because a Roomba can't self-reinforce a delusional loop with its user, making them think its sentient.
@Noisecolor @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @xvf17 @emilymbender Simply saying "we've called other things AI before, even when they clearly weren't" isn't a good argument, it's literally the point we're all trying to make.
Is an LLM a "more advanced" form of software than the path-finding in a Roomba? Yes. Do both have capacity to capture data and update their output over time? Yes.
Are either of them "intelligent"? No. [cont.]
@Noisecolor @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @xvf17 @emilymbender What do I mean be "intelligent"? I don't mean the laymen definition in this instance, but the scientific definition.
The definition we use when discussing whether another species is "intelligent". You could call this "higher order intelligence"; I don't love that term.
The point is, if you class an LLM as "intelligent" in that way, you broaden the definition to every form of life. Even an amoeba "learns" in this manner. [cont.]
@Noisecolor @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @xvf17 @emilymbender But, to return to your own argument, that isn't what the term "AI" was meant for when it was coined. It was explicitly talking about machines that learned **like humans**. That reasoned. That *understood*.
A Roomba no more understands what a chair is when its avoiding its leg as an LLM understands why there aren't four Rs in strawberry. Both have a form of data memory. Neither have *understanding*. Therefore, neither are AI.
@theadhocracy
I think this exchange has ran it's course. You clearly have a very subjective and narrow definition of ai and intelligence in general and you know what. Good for you.
It's not shared by almost no people and certainly almost no experts. You know who shares it, only the anti ai crowd. Strange?
I was hoping for an inkling of an open mind but I see now that's not there
Have a nice day. Take it easy.
@theadhocracy @Noisecolor @xvf17 @emilymbender "machine learning" isn't a marketing term. It's a research term that's been around for a couple decades now. It originated as a linguistic way to describe compute systems incorporating self-adaptive functionality. A better term might have been training, but learning was what they picked.
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @Noisecolor @xvf17 @emilymbender To be clear: not entirely what I meant. I have no issues with the umbrella term "machine learning"; I actually think it works pretty well.
I am specifically talking about GenAI models/LLMs. Again, I think this is a case of linguistic drift. Are they born of ML models? Yes. Do they themselves **learn**. I think that's arguable.
They reincorporate additional data over time. But the core rules don't adapt (caveat incoming)...
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @Noisecolor @xvf17 @emilymbender ... unless they're in some kind of feedback loop, running via multiple layers of models, some of which then manipulate those they have greater write level over. The "shepherd and sheep" model stuff.
But that isn't, again, what most people are talking about. An Agent "learning" your habits isn't the same thing. The input/output model isn't adapting, it's just getting more input.
I think we broadly agree anyway 😅
@Noisecolor @theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender You would REALLY benefit from reading "How to Win Friends and Influence People", because you can be right and still set people deeply against you, and it isn't their bias- it's very much your approach and attitude. A marketing person should already know this though.
People today can get good information from folks who aren't treating them with contempt. Why on earth would they talk to someone rude?
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk
Im not trying to win friends here. I see group of people that's very agitated, usually very rude, when I engage I have to have the block button ready. This time I blocked only two. This group is always on the offensive and conceeds no ground.
So sometimes I try to poke with something that might get someone to selfreflect. Not sure if ever worked.
@theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @theadhocracy @emilymbender @Noisecolor
| Im not trying to win friends here.
That much is crystal clear.
It’s also apparent that you don’t understand LLMs all that well.
@xvf17
Actually I understand them quite well. I worked at a company working on AI. I was the UX designer, however in an environment like that, I got to know everything from pretty up close. I worked on a project of UX ai research. I use AI daily not only for work but also for my personal projects. Learned linux, set up a server, jellyfin, nextcloud, web server,..., i started with Arduino. All with the help of ai.
How well do you know Ilms?
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @theadhocracy @emilymbender
@Noisecolor @xvf17 @theadhocracy @emilymbender How on earth do you think that makes you special here with us? Do you really think you're taking to the uneducated masses? Iguessed I had more experience in this field than you from your tone, and I'm not surprised to find that to be true.
You need to pull your head out of your ass.
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk
Yes. It actually does seem like uneducated masses more or less.
That guy for sure. I doubt you as well.
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @theadhocracy @emilymbender @Noisecolor Well then, you hide it well.
@Noisecolor @theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender
If you aren't bothering to use basic social skills to achieve your goals, you will continue to fail to achieve your goals and it's *not* everyone else's fault for being stupid. They're not the one failing to adapt.
@theadhocracy
Quite the opposite LLMs tick all boxes: They are inorganic ("artificial"), they adjust weights based on data ("learn"), and they synthesize information to solve problems ("think"). Rejecting this is semantic gatekeeping, not historical accuracy.
@xvf17 @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @emilymbender
@Noisecolor @xvf17 @SomeVeganCheeseIsOk @emilymbender No it's goalposts shifting, you're just changing the meaning of words 😂
And I'm not even sure why? Why do you **want** LLMs to be "AI"? If we actually get true AI, it'll be so much more than a statistical averaging model. Shouldn't we reserve the term for when it's applicable, and use terms relevant to the tools we have (like LLM)?
@theadhocracy
I'm making a point how the anti ai mob is silly. Nothing else. It's a pointless debate.
@Noisecolor @theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender Then don't participate. Silence is *free*.
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk
It's important to show when people stop thinking and become a part of a crowd and later a mob. Because that's when bad stuff happens.
Nothing bad can probably happen in this case, but it can be a great growing experience.
@theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender
@Noisecolor @theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender The problem being, you are being an asshole throughout this conversation, and that means nobody will listen or learn anything from you because nobody listens to assholes. So whatever your intent is here, you are failing at it because your approach sets people against you.
I was serious about you reading that book. If you want to be more effective, you need to be far, far less obnoxious.
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk
NHL jeothing would work. The ai hating crowd is all-in. It's a common tactic, to go after the name or into "no true Scotsman" fallacy and deny the existence or trueness of the object of hate. And it's so transparent since the only ones set on this are the anti ai people (true experts i guess).
That's a dead giveaway. And since it is such a giveaway, id expect some malleability. But no. No self reflection. Full steam ahead.
@theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk
You guys are the "it's not real pizza" or "rock is not real music" or "film is not real art" people.
That's how you look from outside when you say what you are saying.
And nobody cares if some people don't like rock music. That's fine. But trying to rationalize your own feelings like that is cringy.
I hope you get some time to think about it.
Let's end it, agree?
@Noisecolor @theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender "you guys"
You didn't understand a *single* thing I wrote in this whole conversation.
@SomeVeganCheeseIsOk
I feel the same way about you.
So at least we can agree on that and end it on a positive note.
Have a nice day, take it easy!
@theadhocracy @xvf17 @emilymbender