• arglebargle@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    I am fully aware of Alan Turnings work and it is rather exceptional when you read that formulas were be8ng created for diffusion models in the late 40’s.

    But i really don’t care thar whoever wrote that wikipedia page believes the hype. We are still in statistical algorithm stages. Even on the wiki page it says thar AI is aware of its surroundings as a feature of AI. We do not have that.

    Also, it appears that most people are still not fooled by “ai” as we have it today, meaning it does not pass even the most basic Turing test. Which a lot of academic believe is not even enough as a marker of ai ad that too wad from the 50’s

    • 0ops@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      “Aware of its surroundings” is a pretty general phrase though. You, presumably a human, can only be as aware as far as your senses enable you to be. We (humans) tend to assume that we have complete awareness of our surroundings, but how could we possibly know? If there was something out there we weren’t aware of, well we aren’t aware of it. What we know as our “surroundings” is a construct the brain invents to parse our own “raw sensor data”. To an LLM, it “senses” strings of tokens. That’s its whole environment, it’s all that it can comprehend. From its perspective, there’s nothing else. Basically all I’m saying is that you seem to be taking awareness-of-surroundings to mean awareness-of-surroundings-like-a-human, when it’s much more broad than that. Arguably uselessly broad, granted, but the intent of the phrase is to say that an AI should observe and react flexibly.

      Really all “AI” is just a handwavy term for “the next step in flexible, reactive computing”. Today that happens to look like LLMs and diffusion models.