• MadMadBunny@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    3 months ago

    Attempting to badly quote someone on another post: « How can people honestly think a glorified word autocomplete function could be able to understand what is a logarithm? »

  • Electricblush@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is so stupid and pointless…

    “Thing not made to solve spesific task fails against thing made for it…”

    This is like saying that a really old hand pushed lawn mower is better then a SUV at cutting grass…

    • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      SUVs aren’t marketed as grass mowers. LLMs are marketed as AI with all the answers.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’d be interested in seeing marketing of ChatGPT as a competitive boardgame player. Is there any?

        • missingno@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          Not necessarily that AI is marketed as a competitive board game player, but that AI is marketed as intelligence. This helps illustrate how clueless it really is.

          • otp@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            There are plenty of geniuses out there who aren’t great at board games. Using a tool not fit for task is more of an issue with the person using the wrong tool than an issue with the tool itself.

            I do get where you’re coming from though. There are definitely people who don’t understand why a ChatBot wouldn’t be good at chess.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Do you expect rocket scientists to be good at chess?

            Intelligence doesn’t mean it’s blanket smart. This is entirely on individual people for this asinine assumption. It’s never been marketed that way, so why in this singular case is the definition suddenly different? The general public understands this isn’t some be all end all. This assumptive attitude that Lemmy has is fucking weird.

            • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              The general public understands this isn’t some be all end all.

              I disagree.

              • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Got a link? Because people just think it’s cool, not that it’s gonna be this thing that can do everything.

                So there must be some place people are getting this “it can do everything” idea from? It’s more an anti-ai propaganda angle, and that’s prevalent mainly on Lemmy. So a source to back up this “ai can do anything” please.

                • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Tradition dictates that the first claimant bears responsibility for the link.

            • missingno@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              I would expect anyone claiming to be intelligent to be able to beat an Atari 2600 set to its very lowest difficulty. This is a task on par with counting the number of Rs in the word ‘strawberry’, something the intelligent ChatGPT also famously cannot do.

              • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                It’s actually not that easy. Fire up an emulator and take it for a spin. Like, you won’t get away with obvious mistakes.

              • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Do you think being good at chess is equivalent to intelligence…?

                Those are also vastly different tasks, a toddler can count, while they likely can’t play chess.

                You have a very strange notion of what “intelligence” means.

                A toddler untrained at counting and untrained at chess would be good at neither. Same goes for adults, you are untrained in rocket physics, so you won’t be good at it either. Why are you holding an ai at some weird ungodly bar that doesn’t apply to anything else? No one’s claimed it to be good at these things. Adults who can’t swim and go in water drown, why? Because they weren’t taught. Notice a pattern yet?

                • missingno@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  It’s the beginner difficulty on very weak hardware. It’s designed to be easily beatable even if you don’t know much about chess.

        • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          These tools are marketed as replacing lots of jobs that are a hell of a lot more complex than a simple board game.

          • otp@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            These tools are marketed as replacing lots of jobs that are a hell of a lot more complex than a simple board game.

            There isn’t really a single sliding scale of “complexity” when it comes to certain tasks.

            Given the appropriate input, a calculator can divide two numbers. But it can’t count the number of R’s in the word “strawberry”.

            Meanwhile, a script that could count the number of instances of a letter in a word could count those R’s, but it couldn’t divide any two numbers.

            Similarly, we didn’t complain that a typewriter couldn’t put pepperoni slices onto a pizza.

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

      If ChatGPT were marketed as a toaster nobody would bat an eye. The reason so many are laughing is because ChatGPT is marketed as a general intelligence tool.

      • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Do you have any OpenAI stuff (ad, interview, presentation…) That claims it’s AGI? Because I’ve never seen such thing, only people hyping it for clicks and ad revenue

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

          I was very careful not to use the term AGI for this reason. General intelligence tool isn’t the same thing. It’s a much weaker claim, yet it’s also a far stronger claim than any purpose-built software. The ambiguity is part of their marketing strategy.

          • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Question remains. Any marketing about it being general intelligence? Not general use, but general intelligence.

            • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              No, though there’s been plenty of marketing where they claim “we know how to build AGI.”

              They have marketed ChatGPT as a general purpose AI from the very beginning, though the question of how to leverage that has remained open.

    • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Your vacuum uses more power than a 150,000-person city just to clean an 8’ square rug?

      That does suck.

      Heh.

  • bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    Is this just because gibbity couldn’t recognize the chess pieces? I’d love to believe this is true otherwise, love my 2600 haha.

  • arararagi@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Man all these people coping, I thought chatgpt was supposed to be a generic one able to do anything?

    • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It depends. Have you used it? If not - Yes! It does do . . . all the things.

      If you have used it, I’m sorry that was incorrect. You simply need to pay for the upgraded subscription. Oh, and as a trusted insider now we can let you in on a secret - the next version of this thing is gonna be, like, wow! Boom shanka! Everyone else will be so far behind!

  • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    That’s on them for taking on the Atari 2600, where “the games don’t get older, they get better!”

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

    If llms are statistics based, wouldn’t there be many many more losing games than perfectly winning ones? It’s like Dr strange saying ‘this is the only way’.

    • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s not even that. It’s not a chess AI or a AGI (which doesn’t exist). It will speak and pretend to play, but has no memory of the exact position of the pieces nor the capability to plan several steps ahead. For ask intended and porpoises, it’s like asking my toddler what’s the time (she always says something that sounds like a time, but doesn’t understand the concept of hours or what the time is)

      The fact that somebody posted this on LinkedIn and not only wasn’t shamed out of his job but there are several articles about it is truly infuriating.

  • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    clop - clop - clop - clop - clop - clop

    . . .

    *bloop*

    . . .

    [screen goes black for 20 minutes]

    . . .

    Hmmmmm.

    clop - clop - clop - clop - clop - clop - clop - clop - clop - clop

    *bloop*

    • Redkey@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      When all you have (or you try to convince others that all they need) is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I guess this shows that it isn’t.