Comment Re:More importantly (Score 1) 12
What you want won't have anything to do with what you get!
What you want won't have anything to do with what you get!
I use Windows, Ubuntu and MacOS. Other than a religious debate, each O/S works well in a desktop environment. There are quirks in each and I just ignore them instead of fighting. Overall, I rate them all very similarly. Privacy concerns in Windows seem to be somewhat overblown, considering the same users have no problems with platforms like Google or Meta.
I've recently started using Macbook Air again after a long time. My previous two Macbook pros had hardware failures. So not a good experience. My previous Dell XPS lasted almost 7 years, although I did have to replace the battery thrice, the keyboard and wifi card once each. I got the Macbook Air primarily for battery life, no fans and instant wakeup (although I think Windows 11 also has instant wakeup now?). This time I have an extended warranty which I think will be equal in expense to what I spent on the Dell.
So far no issues on the OS. Seems less snappier than Windows though.
If it walks like a duck . . .
I don't really care about the inner workings of an AI model. That should not be the standard by which to judge whether something "understands" or not. All it does is keeps changing the goal posts.
The better thing would be to come up with a testable definition of "understanding" or "intelligence" that an AI will fail and only humans will pass.
Reminds me of an old Asimov story about a robot that wanted to be a human. As the robot grew more and more advanced, the govt. kept changing the definition of a human. In the end, the robot deliberately modified it's brain to gradually decay, which was the last requirement to be a human. I think he was finally recognized as a human after he died.
Isn't hallucination very much a human trait? That can not be used as a parameter for "understanding".
Then again, I haven't really seen any definition of "understanding" or "intelligence" that an AI will fail and only humans will pass.
AI's don't just generate perfect sounding English. Ask an LLM a question. Then ask it to explain step by step how it arrived at the answer. It will do so more logically than most humans.
LLMs aren't the end-all as far as AI is concerned. Research is going in many different direction to augment LLMs. Here's a long interview of Eric Schmidt which is surprisingly very clear and easy to follow where he discusses various directions that current research is going in:
"model collapse", is that a new phrase you just learned? Will you be using it in every post now?
I might get mature. You'll still be stupid!
Yes. Posting the same nonsense over and over doesn't seem to be working for you any more!
Look at you! Can't have a post on AI without the local
"Stupidity" is great with this one!
That's assuming AI will remain the same as today, i.e., learning off human output. Actual researchers, and not
The Internet just keeps shining a bright light on your stupidity!
Hey "WayDumberThanAnyone", how will it in any way make any difference to you!
Not at all. I never found Kurzweil interesting beyond his contribution to musical instruments decades ago.
I'm talking about actual researchers and developers like Geoffrey Hinton, Ilya Sutskever, Andrej Karpathy and many others.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
