I'm really surprised that neither the post nor any other comments here seem to actually mention Star Wars. For those unaware, "Clanker" is the term the clone troopers used for the evil battle droids in the Clone Wars animated cartoon series. The show was fairly popular, and people have started to use the term for AI because it's funny.
Clanker: A Word for the Machine
21–29 of 29 posts
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#22I'm really surprised that neither the post nor any other comments here seem to actually mention Star Wars. For those unaware, "Clanker" is the term the clone troopers used for the evil battle droids in the Clone Wars animated cartoon series. The show was fairly popular, and people have started to use the term for AI because it's funny.
I did link this now to the entry in the science fiction dictionary.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#23Strong 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.
I just delegated to AI like 99% of the work in a task that was mostly grunt work: writing tests. It wrote the tests, ran them, and when they found bugs, I had it fix them. The authority might have been delegated, but “agent” is definitely the right word for the amount of initiative I let it have.
“Clanker” is a tad cutesy, but fitting regardless. It brings to mind an archaic and clumsy whirring automaton with no reasoning or awareness of its context, an apt metaphor for slop submissions entirely generated neither by or for humans.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#24> 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 fo…
I think in a way that makes sense, because so many people need to be reminded that AI isn't a person. People don't need a constant reminder that their screwdriver isn't sentient, but people seem to be regularly falling into AI psychosis - a word that actively invokes humanization while immediately shutting it down might be useful if that makes sense? Sorry if I'm failing to properly express myself here lol
I'm not really speaking to the utility of the word, which I think you're more getting at, but more of the hypocrisy of the stated reasoning. He uses clanker to "prevents anthropomorphizing" AI but by having an insulting name, it implies humanizing it (because insults are used to hurt the insultee's feelings or dehumanize them, and to do so implies first humanizing them to have feelings to be hurt by said name). Calling an agent a "conformal prediction large language model" or similar better fits his argument because by it being a description of what it is, it doesn't inherently humanize it in the same way an insulting name must by its nature.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#25I disagree, a clanker need a physical embodiment
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#26The use Armin wants for clanker doesn't work because it is already widely being used as a derogatory term for LLMs. Co-opting the term back to the more neutral use he wants is a long uphill battle (and basically futile).
Regarding his wider point, I think something he's not quite taking into account is how personal language is. Yes, we should always keep in mind the LLM is a machine, but because we're human it's also fine to say "please" and to otherwise "play into" the human-like text that is being outputted. Many children still hug their stuffed animals, knowing that they are inanimate. Adults have been speaking politely to Siri and Alexa for years, which do not give off any vibes of possibly being intelligent or sentient. Purposefully adjusting the way you speak just because you know the thing you're speaking to is inanimate is actually what's strange, and human beings are creatures of habit. There is nothing wrong with speaking respectfully to an LLM even if you are under no delusions that its feelings can be hurt. There is no need to speak curtly or rudely just to remind yourself of this.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I don't even know what their fundamental point/stance is - in support or against clanker
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#28I'm skimming this, and I also agree - machines should not pretend to be human, and we should not pretend they are.
But I do think that, like, being mean to a machine and calling it slurs and telling it it's a piece of shit is bad not because the machine feels bad, but because despite our efforts, we do anthromorphize things, and it will normalize the idea that we can just call "someone" a piece of shit.
I used to call my mom's dog "the horrible hound", and eventually swithced to calling him "the honorable hound", and I explicitly told my kid: I know the dog doesn't know I'm insulting it, but I do, and that's not the kind of person I want to be.
Re: Clanker: A Word for the Machine
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I don't even know what their fundamental point/stance is - in support or against clanker
Why does it have to be either?