• Pennomi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 day ago

    There’s nothing wrong with scientifically proving something that’s commonly known. In fact, that’s an important duty of science, even if it’s not a glamorous one.

    • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      22 hours ago

      You aren’t wrong by in this case, nothing needs to be proven by a 3rd party since anyone recently in programming knows how LLMs works. It’s factual.

      • Pennomi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        21 hours ago

        LLMs are famously NOT understood, even by the scientists creating them. We’re still learning how they process information.

        Moreover, we most definitely don’t know how human intelligence works, or how close/far we are to replicating it. I suspect we’ll be really disappointed by the human mind once we figure out what the fundamentals of intelligence are.

        • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          19 hours ago

          They most definitely are understood. The basics of what they’re doing doesn’t change. Garbage in, garbage out.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      But others have been showing this for years…

      You don’t often hear about the 17th time an experiment reaches the same conclusion.

      But like I said, people will care about it. Because capitalism drives science so it matters more when a billion dollar corporation says it than countless subject matter experts.

      Investors don’t listen to them, but they’ll listen to apple.

      • floo@retrolemmy.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        OK, then, when was the last time this was scientifically proven? By whom? Please provide citations and references.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Just to be clear…

          You want me to show you a study that shows AI needs to be trained to do something?

          Because I can do that, I just realized this is apple and don’t want to get in something that never ends with a fanboy.

          But what would make you happy is something that shows what AI developers spend billions of dollars and violate all types of laws or n pursuit of isn’t just some optional step they can skip and it’ll still do what it does now.

          Cuz thats what it sounds like youre asking for, it’s just a little hard to believe.

          • floo@retrolemmy.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            Exactly as I thought: you’re full of shit.

            That explains a lot