OC below by @HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org

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.

  • Kuinox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’ve been re reading my response and my bad, I meant “artificial neurons were inspired from neurons”, not to behave like, they have little in common.

    If you were to train an LLM on nothing but math and texts about math, then asked it an art question, it would respond somewhat nonsensically with math.

    If you asked an human that speak german and nothing else, a question in english, it would also respond in german (that they cant understand you).
    LLMs sometimes (not often enough) do respond they don’t know.