[HiPhish]

> But it’s not the biblical story. At Babel, the loss of common language stops construction whereas in AI-assisted engineering, construction can continue after shared understanding has already collapsed. The lack of an immediate failure is what makes it curious and a bit disorienting. The tower does not fall, and so we do not notice what was lost. It just keeps rising.

I don't know whether the author thinks this is a good or a bad thing, but in my eyes it's clearly a bad thing. Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit, wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad. AI is the the ultimate form of intelligence with zero wisdom. Actually, it's not even intelligence, it's an illusion of intelligence. If there is no human who can understand what the AI is doing it's time to stop and accept that we do not have the wisdom to contain what we are building.

[The_Blade]

> I don't know whether the author thinks this is a good or a bad thing, but in my eyes it's clearly a bad thing.

I like that the author lets the image do the work, rather than preach at me even if I were to agree. History never repeats itself but it always rhymes.

[csomar]

You picked a bad example because this is a thing where LLMs excel. A human doesn't know that tomato doesn't play well in a fruit salad until he learns it; not that different from LLMs.

What LLMs lack, from my experience, is two things: First, a long term memory (even a zoomed out one) and Second, the ability to execute a multi-step task without fizzling out. Upon adversity, LLMs breakdown and start making shit up. The newer models are better (and that's the difference between Fable/5.6 and GLM 5.2) but still have a very limited ability to execute any tedious planning tasks.

[geraneum]

I have this funny feeling that someone’s probably gonna ask their favorite frontier LLM about the fruit salad thing to refute your point.

[jaza]

Yes!

https://thebullshitmachines.com/

[robocat]

> Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit

Intelligence is learning to avoid using childish cliches, unless your intention was to mislead. Categorisation and understanding dependencies are hard enough problems already.

At the supermarket or taxation (Nix v. Hedden) tomatoes are a vegetable.

[godwinson__4-8]

Speaking of "categorisation and understanding dependencies" and "intelligence" and "fruit":

Interestingly, the Bible does not specify what kind of fruit was on the Tree of Knowledge. The association between the forbidden fruit and an apple was a derivative of later translations.

Imagine the consternation if the claim had become Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden tomato. Then this incessant controversy regarding the tomato's status would take on a biblical dimension... though then perhaps the Mormon claim that the Garden of Eden is to be found in the New World would actually have some credibility. Indeed, answers to some questions are not a matter of intelligence at all. Sometimes it seems to me intelligence is more about knowing what questions to ask in the first place.

[robocat]

> knowing what questions to ask in the first place

That's my 2nd hardest skill when trying to use AI. 3rd hardest is better filtering.

I keep having flashbacks to learning how to use Google effectively.

I'm an arthiest, but I'm in a historically christian society so bible stuff comes up and I often delve in.

Whenever I do look into the bible, it amazes me just how extremely bullshitty vague the bible actually is. I don't understand why people argue about it, or pay attention to past arguments (many famous examples). If I wanted to argue about vague shit I'd be into philosophy or psychology or I could choose any of the many other branches of argument. Humans are not very logical. At least capitalism has a clearer scorecard.

Last nerdsniped look was about Angels due to Scott Alexander:

  (The Bible describes very clearly what angels look like. [snip] This is the highest-grade antimeme I feel comfortable using as an example; if you don’t see the fnords they can’t eat you.)

Edit: Which just meta-nerdsniped me finishing up on the beaut Hispanic word "Marianismo".

[godwinson__4-8]

I am also not religious, but yes the Bible is everywhere. So like you, I acquaint myself for similar reasons.

Though I take issue with one statement you made - "If I wanted to argue about vague shit I'd be into philosophy..." though I do sympathize.

Modern analytic philosophy in particular, if it is good, is all about trying to be exceedingly precise, often in domains where objects like the Bible (as you noted) are exceedingly vague. Philosophy has some catching up to do, but ultimately one should not disparage it so cavalierly. After all, the best philosophers were usually also the members of society most against the sort of uncritical religiosity that seems to appeal to so many, as it does now and even more severely through the ages, before the efforts of such thinkers to enlighten their fellow human were realized.

If there is a subject that seeks to answer the question of "how to ask questions" it is surely philosophy. The best mathematicians were often well acquainted. In the most famous times of "human flourishing" the philosophers and the mathematicians were one and the same.

But yes, there is a lot of bad philosophy. And there is a lot of religion pretending to be science. Sad, but it has always been true.

Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur

[travisa]

Apparently, intelligence is to deliberately misunderstand the point being made

[jacomoRodriguez]

Maybe a tomato would fit quite well in a fruit salad, and the only reason we do not do it is because of arbitrary learned "it's a fruit. But it is treated as vegetable"...