|
|
|
|
|
by Alchemista
854 days ago
|
|
Why not respond to the comments you feel are poorly constructed directly rather than posting what looks like a copy pasta. Some of the items in your list seem like strawmen, because I cannot even find these arguments in this thread as you state them in your list. For example let's take 4 > 4. "People are just anthropomorphizing computer programs." No, critics are anthropomorphizing intelligence. There literally was someone comparing the problems with current ML models to childhood development in this thread. How is this not anthropomorphizing LLMs? It is true human cognition is poorly defined, so the comparison is not very useful to begin with. Which is why anthropomorphizing ML models is problematic. If someone makes a fantastical claim they need to provide strong proof to support it. |
|