This is my favorite new AI argument, took me a few months to see it. Enjoyed it at first.
You start with everyone knows there's AI hype from tech bros. Then you introduce a PhD or two at institutions with good names. Then they start grumbling about anthropomorphizing and who knows what AI is anyway.
Somehow, if it's long enough, you forget that this kind of has nothing to do with anything. There is no argument. Just imagining other people must believe crazy things and working backwards from there to find something to critique.
Took me a bit to realize it's not even an argument, just parroting "it's a stochastic parrot!" Assumes other people are dunces and genuinely believe it's a minihuman. I can't believe MIT Tech Review is going for this, the only argument here is the tests are flawed if you think they're supposed to show the AI model is literally human.
You start with everyone knows there's AI hype from tech bros. Then you introduce a PhD or two at institutions with good names. Then they start grumbling about anthropomorphizing and who knows what AI is anyway.
Somehow, if it's long enough, you forget that this kind of has nothing to do with anything. There is no argument. Just imagining other people must believe crazy things and working backwards from there to find something to critique.
Took me a bit to realize it's not even an argument, just parroting "it's a stochastic parrot!" Assumes other people are dunces and genuinely believe it's a minihuman. I can't believe MIT Tech Review is going for this, the only argument here is the tests are flawed if you think they're supposed to show the AI model is literally human.