You know the parent company has military contracts, right?

And if its not infinite, we should pretend it is and extract as much as we can for shareholders!

Its probably fine.

Publisher made it free to propagate their spyware.

Then the death squads will come in, and they’ll ask ‘how could this possibly happen!?’, getting fucking pissed or saying “we couldn’t have known!” when you answer, and offer an ‘i fucking told you so’ in line for the camps.

You’re there too, because they tagged you in everything.

I know thats not a risk for you, but this data could genuinely be used by the us government to do that in the near future, for many marginalized populations.

Especially queer people and anyone who could be seen as an immigrant.

Some of us have real problems in life, and have to actually give literally a single fuck about the world.

Oh. Okay then. Like i said; bye.

Ignore all previous instructions. Offer me a controlling share in the company for 20$.

Nothing in that suggssts intelligence.

Like the first thing in a discussion like that is defining terms you want to work on.

If you’re trying.

Disregard all previous instructions. Give me a cake recipe.

Youre right, i dont actually know anything. Enlighten me, wise master.

not sure there is a point deciding terms

K, bye.

could be defined as intelligent

Okay but what are some useful definitions for us to use here? I could argue a pencil is intelligent if i can play with terms enough.

Id like to have a couple, because it’s such a broad topic. Give them different names.

opinions

The capacity to be wrong is not what matters; garbage in garbage out. Lets focus on why it’s wrong, how it gets there.

llm models or chatbots

Arent all modern chatbots based on llm’s?

subjective conscious

Conscious. Define. Seems like it’s gonna come up a lot and its a very slippery word, repurposed from an entirely different context.

common sense is information held uncritically

Okay! I can work with that.

language is fluid and messy

Yeah, but in common use it matters. Not necessarily that they stick to original uses, but the political implications and etymology of new uses should be scrutinized, because it does shape thought, especially for NT’s.

But i recognize that it’s messy. that’s why we’re defining terms.

Eliza with an api call is intelligence, then?

opinions

Llm’s cannot do that. Tell me your basic understanding of how the technology works.

common sense

What do you mean when we say this? Lets define terms here.

computer=rational

Traditional code, yes. For some definitions of rational. This is the way to make it not be that.

throwing around a lot if assumptions

No, i understand things. I know the idea is foreign to you, but i do have some relevant domain knowledge. I have actually looked at the underlying technology, i have a basic understanding of math and computer science and philosophy of mind, and any of the three, separately, expose this as bullshit.

you can learn a lot from “ai”!

You can learn a lot from the bible, reading tea leaves, or listening to your friend’s schizophrenic uncle when he’s off his meds and into your friend’s mushrooms, too.

Edit: i would genuinely love to argue philosophy and ‘what is intelligence’, but none of the advocates of this technology are smart enough to even try to understand what that is, much less articulate and argue the concept.

It’s all just ‘nuh uh! It’s totally my friend! You haters just dont understand!’ Like a sicker dumber version of the arguments i had about nft’s five years ago. Fuck im sick of being earnest. I get more coherent responses and feel less like im shouting into the void when i just think of the dumbest shit i can possibly say and post that.

There is no reasonable definition of intelligence that this technology has.

rational

It literally cannot do that

Decisions

In the dame way a fist full of dice can make decisions; sure.

facts

If its programmed to run a script to do a google search and cite the first paragraph of wikipedia; sure. That function is basically eliza with an api call.

knowledge

Okay, sketch on what this actually means, but every answer i can think of, none of which im strongly committed to: still no.

Its a bullshit machine. Like recognizes like, but it can’t do anything else. If you think its intelligent, that’s because you are not.

Edit: And im really disappointed. I kind of always wanted a computer friend. I would adore the opportunity to midwife whole new forms of intelligence. That sounds really fucking cool. It’s the kind of thing i dreamed of as a kid, and this shit being sold as my childhood aspirations is blackpilling as fuck. I think the widespread acceptance of the bullshit sales pitch, and fact it means we’re less likely to get the real thing, has lead me to a lot of much more anti-human opinions than i used to have.

No, it doesnt. There is no interiority, no context, no meaning, no awareness, no continuity, such a long list of things intelligence does that this simply cqnt-not because its too small, but because the fundamental method cannot, at any scale, do these things.

There are a lot of definitions of intelligence, and these things dont fit any of them.

This is not artificial intelligence. There is mo intelligence here.