[mmiliauskas]

Except "this is just" is sprinkled all over NNs, DL and in turn of ChatGPT. Actually they pride themselves on "this is just".

So your argument is probably more accurate for the other camp, or at least as accurate for the other camp as well.

[bjackman]

I'm not sure what you're getting at here but I'll try to respond. My argument is that "this is just" is meaningless as a way to assess the impact of a technology.

If AI researches say, "this is just X and it can do Y!" then fine, that's just framing for "look: Y". When stochastic parrot guys say "this is just X, what's impressive about that?" it throws me for a loop coz they are are refusing to engage with Y.

[simon_000666]

I think we disagree about what Y is. My point is that Y is not that different from materially what is possible with a slack bot from circa 2015. Essentially chatgtp is a less efficient way to get to the same outcomes that were already possible. The trick is that it appears to be something it’s not - AGI.

I like your bronze sword analogy. From my point of view chatgtp is not a bronze sword, it’s a Stone Age sword that someone has painted bronze. It has value because people realize the advantage that a true bronze sword would have in a battle. However, when you actually put it through it’s paces you quickly realise it offers no actual value over what came before.