I have realized a lot of posts on here mostly criticizing the data collection of people to train A.I, but I don’t think A.I upon itself is bad, because A.I- like software development- has many ways of implementations: Software can either control the user, or the user can control the software, and also like software development, some software might be for negative purposes while others may be for better purposes, so saying “Fuck Software” just because of software that controls the user feels pretty unfair, and I know A.I might be used for replacing jobs, but that has happened many times before, and it is mostly a positive move forward like with the internet. Now, I’m not trying to start a big ass debate on how A.I = Good, because as mentioned before, I believe that A.I is as good as its uses are. All I want to know from this post is why you hate A.I as a general topic. I’m currently writing a research paper on this topic, so I would like some opinion.
While I completely agree with most of this, it’s my understanding that we have is a type of AI, as is AGI. LLMs are classified as Narrow AI.
What he means is that he doesn’t hate A.I because it simply doesn’t exist. There is no intelligence in any of the so called “A.I” since all it’s doing is a combination of stolen training data + randomness
Yeah, I can understand the sentiment. I was just clarifying that true intelligence (AGI) is a subset of what we refer to as AI, alongside other subsets such as Narrow AI/LLMs. I agree it’s odd usage of the term, but I can’t find a source otherwise.