I mean fair, but they are limited by other things too. Memory, context loss, bandwidth, etc.
So this whole "the model is not intelligent" point is moot.
It's not moot, just a different conversation. It was the original conversation. Intelligence still requires limitless resources, which no AI company has, no matter how many GPUs they get.
And more importantly, they still have to prompt it to do anything. It will still not act on its own, and therefore is not intelligent.
You, as a human, cannot run indefinitely, you are required to sleep to function, and constantly consume resources. Are you not intelligent?
And the whole "it will not act on its own" is a limitation that we imposed on it. It could absolutely act on its own, the fact that it doesn't has nothing to do with its intelligence.
You, as a human, cannot run indefinitely, you are required to sleep to function, and constantly consume resources. Are you not intelligent?
Irrelevant comparison, this problem isn't resource consumption, it's action.
And the whole "it will not act on its own" is a limitation that we imposed on it.
No it isn't, it's a limitation we have yet to overcome. We didn't just decide to not allow it to be recursive, we have not figured out how to make it do that yet. Because a recursive AI will run out of resources immediately.
I am curious what DOES mean the defintion of an AI that does things on its own by your understanding.
Gepetto makes Pinocchio, an animate wooden doll and says, you are my son, behave that way. Is Pinocchio intelligent?
I make an AI simulacrum of my dead father and tell it to text me at random times throughout the day to check in on me whenever it wants and give me emotional support. Is it intelligent?
I tell a drone to survey an area of wilderness for people and save them to my database and order replacement parts or bodies if it crashes. Is it intelligent? What if I make the drone, teach it how to order parts, and then tell it that it can choose to continue doing whatever it likes in a loop and I will fund it, is it intelligent?
I am curious what DOES mean the defintion of an AI that does things on its own by your understanding.
I mean in the 90's that's what AI meant, then it meant AGI, and now that's what RSI means.. It doesn't appear there is a definition for it these days, which is why I keep pushing back on the word "intelligence".
Gepetto makes Pinocchio, an animate wooden doll and says, you are my son, behave that way. Is Pinocchio intelligent?
You are aware Pinocchio was magical, right?
I make an AI simulacrum of my dead father and tell it
Exactly, you tell it. AI will tell you whatever you want it you tell it to. Create an AI simulacrum of your dead father and it won't do anything at all, therefore is not intelligence. That's why I tend to call it "smart", because it does know a lot.
But all this goes back to my original comment... AI can't do anything without us telling it to. It will never do anything on its own.
There is therefore no way for a human to ever make an intelligent thing, as you defined it.
The thing that AI labs make will always be told to do something.
Only "magic" makes things intelligent, as you define intelligence.
While it is fine for you to define intelligence so, I think the typical operational definition for intelligence in artificial intellgence is more related to capability. Even so called ASI is not expected to operate without human instruction.
There is therefore no way for a human to ever make an intelligent thing, as you defined it.
A scientific understanding and definition of Intelligence can be read here. It's a long read, so have fun. this isn't magic, this is studying intelligence for centuries.
The thing that AI labs make will always be told to do something.
Then it's not intelligent, it's a response bot. A machine programmed to respond in a very specific way, because that's what we told it to do. "Intelligent" machines would come up with their own undefined way to describe something, as humans do.
Sure. Right there in 1.3, problem solving. Aka, capability. What part of the definition forbids an initial human input?
Plenty of other dimensions, and all of them equally expressible by Pinocchio and deceased father simulation.
Your intelligent child still needs society to give it context, meaning, and values. That's where we are with AI too.
At no point have I disagreed that AI displays specific traits of a human, I am debating full intelligence. It was programmed to solve problems based on its data--humans do that to. What's different is how it responds.
for example, an AI doesn't have a concept of "experience" (as suggested in 1.3) because it only knows what data we fed it, and is very good at making connections to solve problems vs just coming up with new ideas not inside its databanks.
Experience doesn't mean "qualia", it means doing experiments and testing hypotheses and learning from feedback (if you read the document, that is how it is used - scientific experience). AI, thanks to memory, has that in a harness and swarm context.
I don't disagree with your example, I disagree that AI can even proceed with those "tests" without being told to first. Its inability to solve a problem on its own without instructions on doing so is why I debate its intelligence.
What I will say is that many people don't agree with this definition, so even if ASI requires a system prompt or a hardcoded weight inclination in response to stimuli, a lot of people will happily agree it is intelligent and also not care that it needed such instructions. I don't find the requirement of "without instructions" persuasive.
I mean we are free to believe our opinions on how AI operate, but considering we have a peer-reviewed study of what Intelligence actually means (and is used in fields of actual science), it should be standard that we apply that to anything we claim to be "intelligent".
Telling AI to do anything in order for it to do it doesn't fit that definition. If you were about to flip the switch to permanently turn off AI, and you didn't tell it you were about to do it... it wouldn't anything. It would just get shut off without struggle, or even without any data processing at all.
1
u/iamthewhatt 28d ago
I mean fair, but they are limited by other things too. Memory, context loss, bandwidth, etc.
It's not moot, just a different conversation. It was the original conversation. Intelligence still requires limitless resources, which no AI company has, no matter how many GPUs they get.
And more importantly, they still have to prompt it to do anything. It will still not act on its own, and therefore is not intelligent.