[CartwheelLinux]

I'm saving all of these articles for the next time we go through the "AI (LLMs) is going to change the world," cycle.

The systems we use can only be as smart and intuitive as the people who prompt them.

On top of it, this (LLMs) is not AI, not even close, if anything they are glorified prediction systems that require human prompting.

[lenerdenator]

> On top of it, this (LLMs) is not AI, not even close, if anything they are glorified prediction systems that require human prompting.

puts in retainer; pushes glasses back up bridge of nose

Technically schpeaking, what you're talking about is the difference between weak AI and strong AI/artificial general intelligence (AGI). AGI is the kind of AI that has reached human levels of consciousness. We're not there yet. Personally, I hope we don't get there, but I'm not the one in charge, so shrug.

You can do a lot with glorified prediction systems that require human prompting. Actually, they are arguably more valuable than AGI because you can more easily communicate and utilize their value proposition. People don't need a machine that wonders the same stuff they do; they need something that does a specific task in lieu of their own effort.

[CartwheelLinux]

Haha. You're 100% correct in the AGI/AI thing. I'm just sick and tired of every article being about AI, it's great people but we can't stop innovating and attending to other areas of technology.

>You can do a lot with glorified prediction systems that require human prompting >People don't need a machine that wonders the same stuff they do; they need something that does a specific task in lieu of their own effort.

This is the problem with our current revision with AI; the way I see it those two are in conflict with each other. In lieu of their own effort, the way a vast amount of the would be users think, is "without promoting" which would lend towards AGI than AI.

>Actually, they are arguably more valuable than AGI because you can more easily communicate and utilize their value proposition.

To you and I this might be true, but to your average non-techie I don't think it's quite as true as you would like it to be.

Short term it is very true, everyone sees the value until you realize it's inherit limitations and the 'shiny, wears off

[0x457]

You're saying it like this is first time AI changes its meaning in marketing. People used to market "smart cycle" in dishwashers as AI.

[CartwheelLinux]

In the dishwasher's defense it is pretty smart compared to an LLM.

[sidewndr46]

Given the level of disruption we'd see if a company reached AGI, wouldn't they be incentivized to somehow hide it? They could just use said AGI to produce inferior versions of itself, each one iteratively a little bit better than before.

[xnx]

> On top of it, this (LLMs) is not AI, not even close,

Do you think that the LLM/AI tools today are better than those from 2 years ago? Do you think the LLM/AI tools in 2 years time will be no better than the ones we have today?

[chamomeal]

Personally I hope they stop getting better. It’s been cool and fun but it’s just starting to freak me out a little lol

[dmitrygr]

False equivalency. Faster and faster stochastic parrots != intelligence.

[iwontberude]

You actually answered their question by reducing two years of LLM improvements to a factor of speed.

Interpreting your non-response: No, two years have not improved things and two more years will not either.