| > If you think being a guide dog doesn't require intelligence, you're delusional. I see you dropped "sniffing out drugs" as a task requiring intelligence, that's a start. > It can use it's innate intelligence to sense danger So sensing danger requires intelligence? Bacteria can sense danger. > navigate around obstacles it's never seen before Not intelligence, but dexterity. Only if it has to solve a puzzle does intelligence come into play. And dogs suck ass at solving puzzles. Some birds are somewhat decent at it, but still very far removed from what an LLM can do. > communicate with other humans through barking Yeah, Timmy fell down a well, right? Perfect example of 'intelligence' and something you'd prefer a dog over an LLM /s > I can't tell if you're trolling at this point. Llms are also trained and therefore are based on repetition and conditioning. That is a fair point, but remember that your training examples were "sniffing for drugs" and "being a guide dog", both of which are very much in-distribution training (guide dogs only do a very specific very small set of things and require a lot of training to even be able to do those). But for the sake of argument, let's say that there are some tasks requiring intelligence where you would prefer a dog over an LLM. Answer me this:
Roughly what percentage of distinct tasks requiring intelligence would you prefer to have a dog over an LLM? For each task, imagine that failure to complete the task will cause serious harm to your loved ones, so the stakes are high. |