• braindefragger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s an LLM with well documented processes and limitations. Not going to even watch this waste of bits.

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      48
      ·
      3 months ago
      1. Making up ur opinion without even listening to those of others… Very open minded of you /s
      2. Alex isn’t trying to convince YOU that ChatGPT is conscious. He’s trying to convince ChatGPT that it’s conscious. It’s just a fun vid where ChatGPT gets kinda interrogated hard. A little hilarious even.
      • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        You cannot convince something that has no consciousness, it’s an matrix of weights that answers based on the given input + some salt

        • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          23
          ·
          3 months ago

          You cannot convince something that has no consciousness

          Why not?

          It’s an matrix of weights that answers based on the given input + some salt

          And why can’t that be intelligence?

          What does it mean to be “convinced”? What does consciousness even mean?

          Making definitive claims like these on terms whose definitions we do not understand isn’t logical.

          • sugartits@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            You cannot convince something that has no consciousness

            Why not?

            Logic.

            It’s an matrix of weights that answers based on the given input + some salt

            And why can’t that be intelligence?

            For the same reason I can’t get a date with Michelle Ryan: it’s a physical impossibility.

            • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              3 months ago

              Logic

              Please explain your reasoning.

              For the same reason I can’t get a date with Michelle Ryan: it’s a physical impossibility.

              Huh?

              • sugartits@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                3 months ago

                Logic

                Please explain your reasoning.

                Others have done this and you seem to be ignoring them, so not sure what the point of you asking is.

                Go look at some of the code that AI is powered by. It’s just parameters. Lots and lots of parameters. Then the output from that is inevitable.

                For the same reason I can’t get a date with Michelle Ryan: it’s a physical impossibility.

                Huh?

                If you’re too lazy to even look up the most basic thing you don’t understand, then I guess we’re done here.

          • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            It’s an matrix of weights that answers based on the given input + some salt

            And why can’t that be intelligence?

            Because human intelligence does far more than respond to prompts with the average response from a data set.

      • Eximius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        If you have any understanding of its internals, and some examples of its answers, it is very clear it has no notion of what is “correct” or “right” or even what an “opinion” is. It is just a turbo charged autocorrect that maybe maybe maybe has some nice details extracted from language about human concepts into a coherent-ish connected mesh of “concepts”.