Posted on 04/26/2025 5:45:57 PM PDT by Lazamataz
The big names in artificial intelligence—leaders at OpenAI, Anthropic, Google and others—still confidently predict that AI attaining human-level smarts is right around the corner. But the naysayers are growing in number and volume. AI, they say, just doesn’t think like us.
The work of these researchers suggests there’s something fundamentally limiting about the underlying architecture of today’s AI models. Today’s AIs are able to simulate intelligence by, in essence, learning an enormous number of rules of thumb, which they selectively apply to all the information they encounter.
This contrasts with the many ways that humans and even animals are able to reason about the world, and predict the future. We biological beings build “world models” of how things work, which include cause and effect.
Many AI engineers claim that their models, too, have built such world models inside their vast webs of artificial neurons, as evidenced by their ability to write fluent prose that indicates apparent reasoning. Recent advances in so-called “reasoning models” have further convinced some observers that ChatGPT and others have already reached human-level ability, known in the industry as AGI, for artificial general intelligence.
For much of their existence, ChatGPT and its rivals were mysterious black boxes.
There was no visibility into how they produced the results they did, because they were trained rather than programmed, and the vast number of parameters that comprised their artificial “brains” encoded information and logic in ways that were inscrutable to their creators. But researchers are developing new tools that allow them to look inside these models. The results leave many questioning the conclusion that they are anywhere close to AGI.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Judging AI by what happened in the 1980s is like judging our capacity for space flight by Otto Lilienthal.
The AI clearly states upfront that it made that assumption based on a daily deposit.
OK...
Daily interest rate (approximately) = \frac{0.04}{365} \approx 0.000109589
Lol true! Just what we need is ai sco.ding us like Greta thunburg with her angryY “how dare you” 😆
Qi is pretty good at writing chapters for books- it can even “humanize the output” to make it more like human speech- its certainly useful for sparking ideas for chapters- and for structuring 3 acts in a novel doing synopsis’ and outlines and such.
I think ai novels are almost here. For now thouhg it’s like a rough first draft where the writer takes and refines it to their writing style and uses it for generating ideas rather than writing complete chapters auto automatical.y. there are even ai “paragraph expanders” which take your writing and can expand in a more “show don’t tell” writing style. Very handy to go off what it suggests.
Also ai is great at sifting through medical literature- I e read that folks and doctors are diagnosing rea,,y hard to diagnose “mystery illnesses and conditions” with the he,p of ai- some truly helpful stuff is emerging with ai. The world is just gonna have of adapt as it is now a new way of life in several key areas-
Art is another area where ai is taking over- some pretty amazing pieces and works are coming out of its even with songs- and poetry- heck it can create new works in like poetry in the style of long dead poets-
Not really the best time to be “budding new Artists/writers/poets/singers etc- but a new field is emerging as “ai assisted writing/poetry/art etc.
Question is Will it be a good thing or bad thing for artists of all genres and mediums?
I don’t think that advanced computer circuitry, just because it is advanced, can create a sentient, self-aware, alive being. It is absurd. It has to be programed and will never advance beyond its programing.
An when computers supposedly start designing computers, there is no way in the world it can achieve perfection and the imperfections will be exponentially extended into oblivion.
The anecdote is to illustrate that, no matter what “miracles” are produced, we still don’t know whether AI is a million monkeys writing shakespeare.
When man can create an AI that produces close-to infallible work, and then the men can explain how the machine rationalized the answers, I’ll be impressed. I’m not saying that man has to be able to predict the answers - just that they have to be able to see a rational thread from start to finish.
Yep- another emerging area of ai interest is in investing. Stock market- ai can very quickly spot emerging prospects, spot stocks that are losing or gaining or possibly about to based o n certain criteria and inputs- Will it put stock brokers and investment firms out of business? Or severely limit their usefulness once fol,s figure out how to harness the power of ai investing advice a d suggestions? Will there be suits agaisnt ai companies if folks lose their shirts using it? How Will ai protect itself from suits going forward? Lots of questions. I note that ai is already being used in areas like court cases, and questions about the lega,ity of it being used for defense is being g called into question.
A court case where a man tried to use an ai figure to “stand in for him” because “he was too nervous stand before a judge” was just recently in the news, and the judge threw a fit over it. Not sure how the case came out thouhg. But I think,it was kinda bri.liant atte pt to stretch the boundaries and test the waters- the ai in the case was basically an avatar onscreen, an I think was using ai to answer questions about the case instead of the guy himself onscreen. The judge however flipped out over it, claiming it was “disrespectful”- the story wax on Newsmax the other night-
At an neural networks class I took at the Air Force Institute of Technology back in the 90s the instructor described a similar problem. They took pictures of a tank they had in various poses: out in the open, hidden in trees, partial shots, from various angles, etc . Then they took pictures of similar backgrounds without the tank. The problem was they took the tank pictures on a sunny day and tankless pictures on a cloudy day (I might have reversed those). Those pictures were then used to train the neural networks and it perfectly recognized sunny = tank, cloudy = no tank. When presented a picture of a tank sitting in the open on a cloudy day it said “no tank”. But it did have a 100% accurate response it recognizing sunny vs. cloudy.
The problem with human customer service, is that I can’t understand at least 80% of what they are saying (if they are speaking English at all, not that I can tell) anymore.
At least when it is a Filipina talking, I can understand most of it after a couple of tries...
The red-dots and/or Pakies, it is rare I can understand more than a couple of their words.
And this is AFTER you hit 1 for English.
If AIs are doing the prediction and trading, how soon will they detach from any real economic data and just try to predict how rival AIs will react? Try faster and faster AIs to get inside the other AIs’ OODA loops.
Yeah true. I’m not smart enough to figure out the pros and cons concerning trading and ai. Was just a thought that occured to me that ai might be able to quickly show trends both positive and negative for certain sectors or stocks. I’d have trouble even wording the inquiries to the ai to check out.
AI only knows what you tell it. Feed it data, wrap it in large language models with rules for data interpretation (which of course can be subject to bias) and what's the result? GIGO. Garbage In, Garbage Out.
Does AI have its place? Yes. Do we have to recognize that it too, can have a BIAS just like a human being? Of course it can because it's CREATED BY HUMANS, the algorithms can be biased, the data can be biased, and the results can be biased.
At sixty-two (coming up on sixty-three) years old, I'm fairly confident when I say AI will NEVER replace human brain capability. Certainly not when it comes to critical thinking and making decisions on an unknown/unforseen number of variables that weren't plugged into an algorithm.
We can "think on the fly" taking in new variables, data, etc.. and make a decision w/o the need for an algorithm to tell us how to do it.
Try that, AI.
“AI doesn’t think, but it is a very useful tool.”
exactly ... Grok 3, for example, is great at searching the Internet and presenting the results in natural language ... i’ve often performed searches the laborious, old-fashioned way and then used Grok 3, and it’s obvious that Grok 3 searched and used the same sources i found.
there’s nothing the least bit intelligent about that, but it IS a fantastic time saver!
when AI can provide the plans for safe and effective nuclear fusion energy generators BEFORE we figure it out ourselves, for example, then i’ll admit that AI is intelligent ...
you gotta be a LOT more specific about what jobs you are talking about....that’s a broad stroke worthy of a dem politician :)
And still smarter than most people. In some ways, smarter than all. Are we sure people think at all?
In my view, any job that is mainly analytical is in danger of being replaced, or upgraded requirements will be needed. Any jobs that where you go through symptoms, Are you experiencing “a or b”, than are you experiencing “a or b” is a potentially replaceable job. An AI can go through a list pretty quickly of eliminating problems or giving recommendations as it eliminates choices by you picking amongst choices as you go through the list.
I can’t be more specific than that, because any job that can be reworked to check off “a or b” before you have to deal with a human could be on the chopping block.
I agree, it would disinclude many of the dependents.
None of this is news. I intuitively figured this back in the 90s when reading Kurzweil’s “The Age of Spiritual Machines”. What a load of hype, hogwash and intelligent people saying dumbass things.
The notion that there is “intelligence” in a machine, a nonliving, helpless, immobile hunk of electrified plastic and metal is so stupid that it would be laughable if it weren’t so degrading.
Computers COMPUTE, they do not think and they have no intelligence. Duh.
That’s because it’s not real, true AI; it’s VI. Big difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.