Comment on Lemmy be like
_cnt0@sh.itjust.works 13 hours ago
I’d welcome actual AI. What is peddled everyday as “AI” is just marketing bullshit. There’s no intelligence in it. Language shapes perception and we should take those words back and use them according to their original and inherent meaning. LLMs are not AI. Stable diffusion is not AI. Neural networks trained for a singular task are not AI.
occultist8128@infosec.pub 11 hours ago
Define “intelligence”
_cnt0@sh.itjust.works 10 hours ago
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence
Take your pick from anything that isn’t recent and by computer scientists or mathematicians, to call stuff intelligent that clearly isn’t. According to some modern marketing takes I developed AI 20 years ago (optimizing search problems for agentic systems); it’s just that my peers and I weren’t stupid enough to call the results intelligent.
occultist8128@infosec.pub 9 hours ago
Yeah I read from that Wiki page — also from intelligence etymology and I totally get comments like yours. However saying LLMs are not AI and other kind of stuff are not AI can’t be accepted and often can lead to misunderstanding to non-techies. On the same Wiki page, there’s also mentioning about “Artificial”, since it’s artifical e.g. not created by nature and not having complex system like us humans, then LLMs can still be categorized as AI. Of course it will still have flaws tho. I’m here not to stand with LLMs but rather just want to tell people that terms misusage that I see oftentimes misleading and can spread misinformation. Let alone those big techs saying AI this and AI that whilst it’s just a subset of AI like LLMs, I just don’t want people here also falling in the same hole like those big techs that are using wrong terms in technology.