Skip to content

We need to stop pretending AI is intelligent

Technology
331 148 4.7k
  • Humans are absolutely more special than organic thinking machines. I'll go a step further and say all living creatures are more special than that.

    Show your proof, then. I've already said what I need to say about this topic.

    If humans are simply thought processes or our productive output then once you have a machine capable of thinking similarly (btw chatbots aren't that and likely never will be) then you can feel free to dispose of humanity.

    We have no idea how humans think, yet you're so confident that LLMs don't and never will be similar? Are you the Techbro now, because you're speaking so confidently on something that I don't think can be proven at this moment. I typically associate that with Techbros trying to sell their products. Also, why are you talking about disposing humanity? Your insecurity level is really concerning.

    Understanding how the human brain works is a wonderful thing that will let us unlock better treatment for mental health issues. Being able to understand them fully means we should also be able to replicate them to a certain extent. None of this involves disposing humans.

    It's a nice precursor to damning humanity to die so that you can have your robot army take over the world.

    This is just more of you projecting your insecurity onto me and accusing me of doing things you fear. All I've said was that humans thoughts are also probabilistic based on the little we know of them. The fact that your mind wander so far off into thoughts about me justifying a robot army takeover of the world is just you letting your fear run wild into the realm of conspiracy theory. Take a deep breathe and maybe take your own advice and go touch some grass.

    All I’ve said was that humans thoughts are also probabilistic based on the little we know of them.

    Much of the universe can be modeled as probabilities. So what? I can model a lot of things as different things. That does not mean that the model is the thing itself. Scientists are still doing what scientists do: being skeptical and making and testing hypotheses. It was difficult to prove definitively that smoking causes cancer yet you're willing to hop to "human thought is just an advanced chatbot" on scant evidence.

    This is just more of you projecting your insecurity onto me and accusing me of doing things you fear.

    No, it's again a case of you buying the bullshit arguments of tech bros. Even if we had a machine capable of replicating human thought, humans are more than walking brain stems.

    You want proof of that? Take a look at yourself. Are you a floating brain stem or being with limbs?

    At even the most reductive and tech bro-ish, healthy humans are self-fueling, self-healing, autonomous, communicating, feeling, seeing, laughing, dancing, creative organic robots with GI built-in.

    Even if a person one day creates a robot with all or most of these capabilities and worthy of considering having rights, we still won't be the organic version of that robot. We'll still be human.

    I think you're beyond having to touch grass. You need to take a fucking humanities course.

  • You could say they're AS (Actual Stupidity)

    Autonomous Systems that are Actually Stupid lol

  • My thing is that I don’t think most humans are much more than this. We too regurgitate what we have absorbed in the past. Our brains are not hard logic engines but “best guess” boxes and they base those guesses on past experience and probability of success. We make choices before we are aware of them and then apply rationalizations after the fact to back them up - is that true “reasoning?”

    It’s similar to the debate about self driving cars. Are they perfectly safe? No, but have you seen human drivers???

    Human brains are much more complex than a mirroring script xD The amount of neurons in your brain, AI and supercomputers only have a fraction of that. But you're right, for you its not much different than AI probably

  • Human brains are much more complex than a mirroring script xD The amount of neurons in your brain, AI and supercomputers only have a fraction of that. But you're right, for you its not much different than AI probably

    The human brain contains roughly 86 billion neurons, while ChatGPT, a large language model, has 175 billion parameters (often referred to as "artificial neurons" in the context of neural networks). While ChatGPT has more "neurons" in this sense, it's important to note that these are not the same as biological neurons, and the comparison is not straightforward.

    86 billion neurons in the human brain isn't that much compared to some of the larger 1.7 trillion neuron neural networks though.

  • My thing is that I don’t think most humans are much more than this. We too regurgitate what we have absorbed in the past. Our brains are not hard logic engines but “best guess” boxes and they base those guesses on past experience and probability of success. We make choices before we are aware of them and then apply rationalizations after the fact to back them up - is that true “reasoning?”

    It’s similar to the debate about self driving cars. Are they perfectly safe? No, but have you seen human drivers???

    Self Driving is only safer than people in absolutely pristine road conditions with no inclement weather and no construction. As soon as anything disrupts "normal" road conditions, self driving becomes significantly more dangerous than a human driving.

  • The human brain contains roughly 86 billion neurons, while ChatGPT, a large language model, has 175 billion parameters (often referred to as "artificial neurons" in the context of neural networks). While ChatGPT has more "neurons" in this sense, it's important to note that these are not the same as biological neurons, and the comparison is not straightforward.

    86 billion neurons in the human brain isn't that much compared to some of the larger 1.7 trillion neuron neural networks though.

    Keep thinking the human brain is as stupid as AI hahaaha

  • The human brain contains roughly 86 billion neurons, while ChatGPT, a large language model, has 175 billion parameters (often referred to as "artificial neurons" in the context of neural networks). While ChatGPT has more "neurons" in this sense, it's important to note that these are not the same as biological neurons, and the comparison is not straightforward.

    86 billion neurons in the human brain isn't that much compared to some of the larger 1.7 trillion neuron neural networks though.

    It's when you start including structures within cells that the complexity moves beyond anything we're currently capable of computing.

  • Keep thinking the human brain is as stupid as AI hahaaha

    have you seen the American Republican party recently? it brings a new perspective on how stupid humans can be.

  • Anyone pretending AI has intelligence is a fucking idiot.

    AI is not actual intelligence. However, it can produce results better than a significant number of professionally employed people...

    I am reminded of when word processors came out and "administrative assistant" dwindled as a role in mid-level professional organizations, most people - even increasingly medical doctors these days - do their own typing. The whole "typing pool" concept has pretty well dried up.

  • I know it doesn't mean it's not dangerous, but this article made me feel better.

    A gun isn't dangerous, if you handle it correctly.

    Same for an automobile, or aircraft.

    If we build powerful AIs and put them "in charge" of important things, without proper handling they can - and already have - started crashing into crowds of people, significantly injuring them - even killing some.

  • My thing is that I don’t think most humans are much more than this. We too regurgitate what we have absorbed in the past. Our brains are not hard logic engines but “best guess” boxes and they base those guesses on past experience and probability of success. We make choices before we are aware of them and then apply rationalizations after the fact to back them up - is that true “reasoning?”

    It’s similar to the debate about self driving cars. Are they perfectly safe? No, but have you seen human drivers???

    If an IQ of 100 is average, I'd rate AI at 80 and down for most tasks (and of course it's more complex than that, but as a starting point...)

    So, if you're dealing with a filing clerk with a functional IQ of 75 in their role - AI might be a better experience for you.

    Some of the crap that has been published on the internet in the past 20 years comes to an IQ level below 70 IMO - not saying I want more AI because it's better, just that - relatively speaking - AI is better than some of the pay-for-clickbait garbage that came before it.

  • Self Driving is only safer than people in absolutely pristine road conditions with no inclement weather and no construction. As soon as anything disrupts "normal" road conditions, self driving becomes significantly more dangerous than a human driving.

    Human drivers are only safe when they're not distracted, emotionally disturbed, intoxicated, and physically challenged (vision, muscle control, etc.) 1% of the population has epilepsy, and a large number of them are in denial or simply don't realize that they have periodic seizures - until they wake up after their crash.

    So, yeah, AI isn't perfect either - and it's not as good as an "ideal" human driver, but at what point will AI be better than a typical/average human driver? Not today, I'd say, but soon...

  • The human brain contains roughly 86 billion neurons, while ChatGPT, a large language model, has 175 billion parameters (often referred to as "artificial neurons" in the context of neural networks). While ChatGPT has more "neurons" in this sense, it's important to note that these are not the same as biological neurons, and the comparison is not straightforward.

    86 billion neurons in the human brain isn't that much compared to some of the larger 1.7 trillion neuron neural networks though.

    But, are these 1.7 trillion neuron networks available to drive YOUR car? Or are they time-shared among thousands or millions of users?

  • have you seen the American Republican party recently? it brings a new perspective on how stupid humans can be.

    Nah, I went to public high school - I got to see "the average" citizen who is now voting. While it is distressing that my ex-classmates now seem to control the White House, Congress and Supreme Court, what they're doing with it is not surprising at all - they've been talking this shit since the 1980s.

  • The book The Emperors new Mind is old (1989), but it gave a good argument why machine base AI was not possible. Our minds work on a fundamentally different principle then Turing machines.

    Our minds work on a fundamentally different principle then Turing machines.

    Is that an advantage, or a disadvantage? I'm sure the answer depends on the setting.

  • All I’ve said was that humans thoughts are also probabilistic based on the little we know of them.

    Much of the universe can be modeled as probabilities. So what? I can model a lot of things as different things. That does not mean that the model is the thing itself. Scientists are still doing what scientists do: being skeptical and making and testing hypotheses. It was difficult to prove definitively that smoking causes cancer yet you're willing to hop to "human thought is just an advanced chatbot" on scant evidence.

    This is just more of you projecting your insecurity onto me and accusing me of doing things you fear.

    No, it's again a case of you buying the bullshit arguments of tech bros. Even if we had a machine capable of replicating human thought, humans are more than walking brain stems.

    You want proof of that? Take a look at yourself. Are you a floating brain stem or being with limbs?

    At even the most reductive and tech bro-ish, healthy humans are self-fueling, self-healing, autonomous, communicating, feeling, seeing, laughing, dancing, creative organic robots with GI built-in.

    Even if a person one day creates a robot with all or most of these capabilities and worthy of considering having rights, we still won't be the organic version of that robot. We'll still be human.

    I think you're beyond having to touch grass. You need to take a fucking humanities course.

    you're willing to hop to "human thought is just an advanced chatbot" on scant evidence.

    Not what I said, my point is that humans are organic probabilistic thinking machine and LLMs are just an imitation of that. And your assertion that an LLM is never ever gonna be similar to how the brain works is based on what evidence, again?

    You want proof of that? Take a look at yourself. Are you a floating brain stem or being with limbs?

    At even the most reductive and tech bro-ish, healthy humans are self-fueling, self-healing, autonomous, communicating, feeling, seeing, laughing, dancing, creative organic robots with GI built-in.

    Even if a person one day creates a robot with all or most of these capabilities and worthy of considering having rights, we still won't be the organic version of that robot. We'll still be human.

    What the hell are you even rambling about? Its like you completely ignored my previous comment, since you're still going on about robots.

    Bro, don't hallucinate an argument I never made, please. I'm only discussing about how the human mind works, yet here you are arguing about human limbs and what it means to be human?

    I'm not interested in arguing against someone who's more interested with inventing ghosts to argue with instead of looking at what I actually said.

    And again, go take your own advice and maybe go to therapy or something.

  • So why is a real “thinking” AI likely impossible? Because it’s bodiless. It has no senses, no flesh, no nerves, no pain, no pleasure.

    This is not a good argument.

    Actually it's a very very brief summary of some philosophical arguments that happened between the 1950s and the 1980s. If you're interested in the topic, you could go read about them.

  • Tell that to the crows and chimps that know how to solve novel problems.

    Thats the point

  • AI is not actual intelligence. However, it can produce results better than a significant number of professionally employed people...

    I am reminded of when word processors came out and "administrative assistant" dwindled as a role in mid-level professional organizations, most people - even increasingly medical doctors these days - do their own typing. The whole "typing pool" concept has pretty well dried up.

    However, there is a huge energy cost for that speed to process statistically the information to mimic intelligence. The human brain is consuming much less energy.
    Also, AI will be fine with well defined task where innovation isn't a requirement. As it is today, AI is incapable to innovate.

  • AI is not actual intelligence. However, it can produce results better than a significant number of professionally employed people...

    I am reminded of when word processors came out and "administrative assistant" dwindled as a role in mid-level professional organizations, most people - even increasingly medical doctors these days - do their own typing. The whole "typing pool" concept has pretty well dried up.

    you can give me a sandwige and ill do a better job than AI

  • 14 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    tal@lemmy.todayT
    data centers and supercomputing facilities, which consume voracious amounts of electricity and water Memphis is on the Mississippi. Evaporating the volume of the Mississippi at Memphis with graphics cards would be a pretty impressive feat. kagis https://snoflo.org/flow/report/tennessee/ TENNESSEE FLOW REPORT August 22 2025 Streamflow levels across Tennessee are currently 92.0% of normal, with the Mississippi River At Memphis reporting the highest discharge in the state with 354000cfs 345,000 cubic feet of water per second is a pretty substantial amount of water. EDIT: Water has a heat of vaporization of 2.23 kJ/g. 345k ft³ water is 9.7×10⁹ cm³, so 9.7×10⁹g That's about 2.2×10¹⁰kJ to vaporize it (disregarding the specific heat of water, just the heat of vaporization). 1kJ ≈ 0.28 Wh. So 6,160,000,000 Wh to vaporize the water going through in a second. 3,600 seconds in an hour. So at a flow rate of 345k ft³ that'd sink about 22 trillion watts through vaporization alone. https://www.e-education.psu.edu/egee102/node/1925 In 2024, the world wide energy consumption was about 186,000 TWhs 8760 hours in a year. So global average power usage is about 21 TW. If we put the entire world's generated electricity towards heat to vaporize the Mississippi at Memphis, it'd still fall a bit short. EDIT2: I also inadvertently transposed two digits (should be 354,000 ft³/sec rather than 345,000 ft³/sec) in transcribing the initial flow rate, so it'd fall slightly shorter.
  • 40 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    ghostlypixel@lemmy.worldG
    Anecdotal, but every company I have worked for has banned using ad blockers, I’m guessing the risk from ads is lower than allowing extensions to read and modify all of your webpage data? I use them on all of my personal devices.
  • 147 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    44 Aufrufe
    M
    Good if true, but of course they'll find a scapegoat for this, as all big corporations do.
  • The challenge of deleting old online accounts | Loudwhisper

    Technology technology
    12
    59 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    75 Aufrufe
    L
    Thanks. Absolutely my experience too. The ones where you can't edit the email I noticed often used the email as username, and probably god knows how bad is the code on the backend.
  • Using Clouds for too long might have made you incompetent

    Technology technology
    87
    166 Stimmen
    87 Beiträge
    2k Aufrufe
    M
    I was recruited as an R&D engineer by a company that was sales focused. It was pretty funny being recruited like a new sales hire: limo from the airport, etc. Limo driver didn't work direct for the company but she did a lot of work for them, it was an hour drive both ways to/from the "big" airport they used. She said most of the sales recruits she drove in were clueless kids, no idea how the world worked yet at all - gunning for a big commission job where 9/10 hires wash out within a year. At least after I arrived on-site I spent the day with my prospective new department, that was a pretty decent process. The one guy I didn't interview well with turned out to be the guy who had applied to the spot I was taking and had been passed over. As I was walking in on my first day he was just finishing moving his stuff out of the window-office desk he was giving up for me, into a cube. I can understand why he was a little prickly.
  • Oracle Inks Cloud Deal Worth $30 Billion a Year

    Technology technology
    2
    13 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    41 Aufrufe
    J
    And it mentioned nothing...
  • Men are opening up about mental health to AI instead of humans

    Technology technology
    341
    521 Stimmen
    341 Beiträge
    23k Aufrufe
    kingthrillgore@lemmy.mlK
    If I had nothin else going on I'd probably do it
  • 207 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    343 Aufrufe
    L
    people do get desensitized down there from watching alot of porn, and there were other forums discussing thier "ED" from decade of porn watching.