[deadbabe]

Any appearance of understanding is just an illusion. It’s an LLM, nothing more.

[chatcode]

Sure, but that seems like it'll be a distinction without a difference for many use cases.

Having a reliable emotional model of a person based on their voice (or voice + appearance) can be useful in a thousand ways.

Which seems to represent a new frontier.

[deadbabe]

It’s sad that I get downvoted so easily just for saying the truth. People’s beliefs about AI here seems to approach superstition rather than anything based in computer science.

These LLM are nothing more than really big spreadsheets.

[hombre_fatal]

Or most of us know the difference between reductiveness and insightfulness.

"Um it's just a big spreadsheet" just isn't good commentary and reminds me of people who think being unimpressed reveals some sort of chops about them, as if we might think of them as the Simon Cowell of tech because they bravely reduced a computer to an abacus.

[deadbabe]

Hyping things up with magical thinking isn’t great either.

[chpatrick]

Isn't that what you're doing with the magic human understanding vs the fake machine understanding?

[chpatrick]

Any appearance of understanding is just an illusion. It’s just a pile of meat, nothing more.

[mike00632]

Does anyone else, when writing comments, feel that you need to add a special touch to somehow make it clear that a human wrote it?