Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Four Fallacies of Modern AI

blog.apiad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 96 posts

Re: Four Fallacies of Modern AI

#21

Post by cpa »

ta20240528 wrote: post #11
theturtlemoves wrote: post #7

I've always had the feeling that AI researchers want to build their own human without having to change diapers being part of the process. Just skip to adulthood please, and learn to drive a car without having experience in bumping into things and hurting yourself. > Language doesn't just describe reality; it creates it. I wonder if this is a statement from the discussed paper or from the blog author. Haven't found th…

> Language doesn't just describe reality; it creates it. I never under stand these kinds of statements. Does the sun not exist until we have a word for it, did "under the rock" not exist for dinosaurs?

The sun can mean different things to different people. We usually think of it as the physical star, but for some ancient civilizations it may have been seen as a person or a god. Living with these different representations can, in a very real way, shape the reality around you. If you did not have a word for freedom, would as many desire it?

Re: Four Fallacies of Modern AI

#22

Post by sanxiyn »

ta20240528 wrote: post #11
theturtlemoves wrote: post #7

I've always had the feeling that AI researchers want to build their own human without having to change diapers being part of the process. Just skip to adulthood please, and learn to drive a car without having experience in bumping into things and hurting yourself. > Language doesn't just describe reality; it creates it. I wonder if this is a statement from the discussed paper or from the blog author. Haven't found th…

> Language doesn't just describe reality; it creates it. I never under stand these kinds of statements. Does the sun not exist until we have a word for it, did "under the rock" not exist for dinosaurs?

I am not sure how your sun example relates. Language is not whole of reality, but it is clearly part of reality. Memory engram of Coca-Cola is encoded in billions of human brains all over the world, and they are arrangement of atoms.

Re: Four Fallacies of Modern AI

#24

Post by cantor_S_drug »

entropyneur wrote: post #18

This article seems to fall straight into the trap it aims to warn us about. All this talk about "true" understanding, embodiment, etc. is needless antropomorphizing. A much better framework for thinking about intelligence is simply as the ability to make predictions about the world (including conditional ones like "what will happen if we take this action"). Whether it's achieved through "true understanding" (however…

Imagine LLM is conscious (as Anthropic wants us to believe). Imagine LLM is made to train on so much data which is far beyond what its parameter count allows for. Am I hurting the LLM by causing it intensive cognitive strain?

Re: Four Fallacies of Modern AI

#25

Post by lovecg »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #19
joshribakoff wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I let them know today — when i laid on my horn while passing a Waymo stopped at a green light blocking the left turn lane — with its right blinker on. Re: Tesla, this company paid me nearly $250,000 under multiple lemon law claims for their “self driving” software issues i identified that affected safety. We all know what happened with Cruise, which was after i declared myself constructively dismissed. I think the ch…

I need to ask because I'm curious, are you using em-dashes ironically, habitually from the Before Times, or did you run your comment through chatgpt first? Or have I been brainwashed into emdash == AI always?

They’re putting spaces around the em-dashes which is—believe it or not—incorrect usage. ChatGPT doesn’t put in spaces. (I’m annoyed by this since I learned about em-dashes long before AI and occasionally use them in writing, which now gets me an occasional AI accusation)

Re: Four Fallacies of Modern AI

#26

Post by CuriouslyC »

shubhamjain wrote: post #12

> The primary counterargument can be framed in terms of Rich Sutton's famous essay, "The Bitter Lesson," which argues that the entire history of AI has taught us that attempts to build in human-like cognitive structures (like embodiment) are always eventually outperformed by general methods that just leverage massive-scale computation This reminds me Douglas Hofstadter, of the Gödel, Escher, Bach fame. He rejected al…

Brute force will always be part of the story, but it's not the solution. It just allows us to take an already working solution and make it better.

Re: Four Fallacies of Modern AI

#28

Post by adastra22 »

cantor_S_drug wrote: post #24
entropyneur wrote: post #18

This article seems to fall straight into the trap it aims to warn us about. All this talk about "true" understanding, embodiment, etc. is needless antropomorphizing. A much better framework for thinking about intelligence is simply as the ability to make predictions about the world (including conditional ones like "what will happen if we take this action"). Whether it's achieved through "true understanding" (however…

Imagine LLM is conscious (as Anthropic wants us to believe). Imagine LLM is made to train on so much data which is far beyond what its parameter count allows for. Am I hurting the LLM by causing it intensive cognitive strain?

Why would that hurt?

Re: Four Fallacies of Modern AI

#30

Post by kortilla »

warkdarrior wrote: post #2

> a fully self-driving car remains stubbornly just over the horizon Someone should let Waymo, Zoox, Pony.ai, Apollo Go, and even Tesla know!

Waymo doesn’t drive on highways and needs huge break in periods to even expand its boundaries in cities it’s already operating in.
Post reply on HN