Skip to main content
Philosophy

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

9
  • 4
    In Seven Pillars for the Future of Artificial Intelligence by Cambrai, Wang, Ho': The main goal of most tech companies is not designing the building blocks of intelligence but simply creating products that existing and potential customers deem intelligent. In this context, instead of labeling it as ‘artificial’ intelligence, it may be more apt to characterize such research as ‘pareidoliac’ intelligence.
    – David Tonhofer
    Commented Apr 16 at 19:25
  • 2
    Further read: Can Machines Be in Language? - Large language models brought language to machines. Machines are not up to the challenge. by Peter J. Denning and B. Scot Rousse
    – David Tonhofer
    Commented Apr 16 at 19:27
  • 1
    Too short to be a proper answer, but LLMs are actually really bad at corresponding language to non-linguistic objects. Absent either very careful training or a secondary technology for handling it, a generative LLM will answer, "Done, here you go" or similar to requests for some non-linguistic object (like ordering take-out and sending a receipt, or drawing a picture), while neither completing the task nor exhibiting any awareness that it hasn't completed the task.
    – Tim C
    Commented Apr 16 at 20:50
  • 1
    @user66697 no no, i do mean 'support'
    – ac15
    Commented May 3 at 14:52
  • 1
    i started a question about my confusion about this apologies to anyone who finds that annoying
    – andrós
    Commented May 3 at 15:55