Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jibal 194 days ago
That's a fallacy of denial of the antecedent. You are inferring from the fact that airplanes really fly that AIs really think, but it's not a logically valid inference.
3 comments

"Observing a common (potential) failure mode"

That's not what we have here.

"It is only a fallacy if you "P, therefore C" which GP is not (at least to my eye) doing."

Some people are willfully blind.

Observing a common (potential) failure mode is not equivalent to asserting a logical inference. It is only a fallacy if you "P, therefore C" which GP is not (at least to my eye) doing.
Yeah at that point, just arguing semantics