[freejazz]

>It can reason better than most humans put into the same situation.

On what basis do you allege this? People say the most unhinged stuff here about AI, and it so often goes completely unchallenged. This is a huge assertion that you are making.

[jiggawatts]

The equivalent of what current-gen LLMs do is an oral examination. Picture standing in the middle of a room surrounded by subject matter experts grilling you for your knowledge of various random topics. You have no tools, no calculator, no pencil and paper.

You’re asked a question and you just have to spit out the answer. No option to backtrack, experiment, or self correct.

“Translate this to Hebrew”.

“Is this a valid criticism of this passage from a Platonic perspective?”

“Explain counterfactual determinism in Quantum Mechanics.”

“What is the cube root of 74732?”

You would fail all of these. The AI gets 3 of 4 correct.

Tell me who’s smarter?

You because of your preconceptions, or because of real superiority?

Your model for human intelligence is probably more like this scene: https://youtu.be/KvMxLpce3Xw?si=Suy0Cj_pL0vru5Uj

The reality is the opposite. The AI could answer questions in this scenario but no nonfictional human could.

[freejazz]

It's just a completely baseless comparison the way you are going about it, and you are mistaking intelligence for the recitation of facts

>“Is this a valid criticism of this passage from a Platonic perspective?”

I haven't seen AI answering questions like this correctly at all