OC below by @[email protected]

What called my attention is that assessments of AI are becoming polarized and somewhat a matter of belief.

Some people firmly believe LLMs are helpful. But programming is a logical task and LLMs can’t think - only generate statistically plausible patterns.

The author of the article explains that this creates the same psychological hazards like astrology or tarot cards, psychological traps that have been exploited by psychics for centuries - and even very intelligent people can fall prey to these.

Finally what should cause alarm is that on top that LLMs can’t think, but people behave as if they do, there is no objective scientifically sound examination whether AI models can create any working software faster. Given that there are multi-billion dollar investments, and there was more than enough time to carry through controlled experiments, this should raise loud alarm bells.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    2
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    I don’t think y’all are disagreeing but maybe this sentence is somewhat confusing:

    If you think LLMs doesnt think (I won’t argue that they arent extremely dumb), please define what is thinking,

    Maybe the “doesnt” shouldn’t be there.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      No it is here because that’s what they claim.
      Nobody yet know how it work, we don’t know how LLMs process information.
      Anyone who claim it really think, or it isn’t thinking, is believing, this is not something the current ML field know.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        611 days ago

        Well, the neural network is given a prefix (series of tokens) and a token, and it spits out how likely is it that the token follows the prefix. Text is generated by calculating this probability for all known tokens, then picking one random, weighted based on the calculated probabilities.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          311 days ago

          And the brain is made out of neurons that sends electric signals between them and operate muscles.
          That doesnt explain how the brain think.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            311 days ago

            It allows us to conclude that an LLM doesn’t “think” about what it is saying. Based on the mechanics, the LLM doesn’t even know it’s a participant in the conversation.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              311 days ago

              By that logic we also conclude that the human brain doesn’t “think” about what it is saying.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                211 days ago

                That does not follow. I can’t speak for you, but I can tell if I’m involved in a conversation or not.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  110 days ago

                  And how do you know LLMs can’t tell that they are involved in a conversation?

                  Unless you think there is something non-computational in the human brain, then you must accept that computers are - in theory - capable of thinking. With the right software and sufficiently powerful hardware.

                  Given that truth (which I think you can only avoid through religion or quantum quackery), you can’t just say “it’s only maths; it can’t be thinking” because we know that maths can think.

                  Do LLMs “think”? The definition of “think” is wooly enough and we understand them little enough that it’s quite an assertion to say that they definitely don’t.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    110 days ago

                    And how do you know LLMs can’t tell that they are involved in a conversation?

                    It has no memory, for one. What makes you think that it does know its in a conversation?