|
|
|
|
|
|
by sshine
461 days ago
|
|
|
> a single human cell is more like an ecosystem than a machine Good point. Not to mention the massive reliance on organisms like mitochondria and bacteria that don’t even share the host’s DNA. > [imitate human labor] within extremely narrow confines and quite often going over into just conjuring up nonsense Much like human labor. So the intelligent, reflective and thoroughly iterated work is hardly replicated at all, and the poorly imitated, easily repeatable coursework and boring paper sludgework excellently so. So we don’t just get to criticise LLMs for not actually being intelligent. We similarly get to criticise humans for not being so when we might think we are, either. |
|
|
So? Does your car stop being a machine just because it's a complex systems of moving parts, many of which are dynamically balanced through feedback loops, which involve components sourced from different vendors, and substances that are not part of the original manufacturing data sheet?
Exactly what insight does this give us? I feel this is trying to contrast a single machine "unit" against a complex system, while also sneakily committing a naturalistic fallacy by using "machine" vs. "ecosystem" to imply "machine" vs. "life" in the magical sense (i.e. as if life was something beyond a physical process).