|
|
|
|
|
by SpicyLemonZest
24 days ago
|
|
I’m just not sure what a convincing argument could look like anymore. We’re past the point where there’s any concrete intellectual capability that AIs can’t demonstrate, and it’s rare these days for anyone to even try to present me with one. I would not say “insecure”, but it’s clear to me that the remaining holdouts have religious objections at this point: you can’t call any LLM intelligent, no matter what it’s capable of outputting, since it doesn’t have a soul like me. Nothing I can really say to argue with that. |
|
How about "will" and "desire"? These seem like things an actual intelligence would have.
> it’s clear to me that the remaining holdouts have religious objections at this point
From where I sit, it sure seems like claims of having achieved AGI are religious in nature.
- The very definition of AGI is not agreed upon, much less definitions of god
- Despite the burden of proof being on those claiming AGI, every request for proof is spurned with a "no u"