Clanker: A Word for the Machine
lucumr.pocoo.org
Clanker: A Word for the Machine
1–10 of 29 posts
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#2I have seen this terminology for first time. Interesting wordplay. You're trying to dismantle the aspects of consciousness, empathy, moral compass altogether from the AI tools hardware or software. But default I think it is already in a dehyphenated form.
Before I bought my first car I used to think I would call my Moving Machine because yes it just moves, but then I go on to call it by name and take pride and feel happy when I ride it. It is humans who attach values and emotions to machines not the other way. And this would be the only distinguishing factor between the two of us for eternity.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#3I have seen this terminology for first time. Interesting wordplay. You're trying to dismantle the aspects of consciousness, empathy, moral compass altogether from the AI tools hardware or software. But default I think it is already in a dehyphenated form. Before I bought my first car I used to think I would call my Moving Machine because yes it just moves, but then I go on to call it by name and take pride and feel h…
Its hard to follow your comment as there's a variety of misused words (eg dismantle, dehyphenated) and typos/errors.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#4If a meatbag uses this word in public, they're rightly going to get punched. It's not their word to claim. Is there any wonder the word has become associated with slavery and racism?
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#5Setting aside the history of anthropomorphism of robots using this term: https://sfdictionary.com/view/3048/clanker
A clanker doesn't clank? It feels more like an emotional name — a pet name or derogatory name — as opposed to a name that evokes a tool-like view of the thing. A typer? an autocompleter? auto-sed? LLM? All probably would have less emotional feeling to it due to being rooted in the actions performed.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#6Strong agree with the point that "agents" shouldn't be called "agents", as agency lies with human. That being said, I don't like the word clanker either.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#7I have seen this terminology for first time. Interesting wordplay. You're trying to dismantle the aspects of consciousness, empathy, moral compass altogether from the AI tools hardware or software. But default I think it is already in a dehyphenated form. Before I bought my first car I used to think I would call my Moving Machine because yes it just moves, but then I go on to call it by name and take pride and feel h…
Its hard to follow your comment as there's a variety of misused words (eg dismantle, dehyphenated) and typos/errors.
I don't think it's that hard to follow, and I'm not convinced your comment is adding to the discourse particularly.
In response to OP: the question is just whether you believe LLMs can now, or will in future, be able to experience something similar to an emotion as to whether you're right or not.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#8I prefer the term clanker. It accurately sketches LLMs for what they are: heartless machines. However, none of them make that tinman clank sound, so it is still a bit imprecise. Once we have them walking and talking, it will be perfect.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#9[flagged]
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#10> The reason I liked the word is precisely the opposite of that use. I want language that prevents anthropomorphizing. I want a word that says: this is a tool, a machine of numbers and matrices
I understand wanting the language to reflect the actuality that these agents are just code doing predictive word guessing and not a feeling person. The irony is by using a word that culturally reflects and is used as a slur for AI rather than more precise wording that describes what an agent is to "creates distance from the machine", you are paradoxically humanizing it just enough to dehumanize it with the word.