That’s why I only eat them twice a week.

I know it’s not the healthiest of the foods but being Finnish chicken it’s at least not seasoned with literal poison and considering that I airfry them it’s at least better than deepfryed. Let me have my wings and comforting lies. Cooking and eating is such a struggle for me.

Who says that and what does it have to do with Facebook and Instagram?

No. That’s kind of the point of the platform. Each instance has their own admins and mods.

This isn’t about me.

It depends on the instance. On feddit.uk they just want to make sure you’re a real person.

What do you tell the admin when you give a reason to join on a new account? Do you just tell them the truth?

Nobody has ever asked about it.

There’s nothing else in your reply for me to respond to. I made a comment about statistical probabilities and you responded with ramblings about AGI that in no way address anything I said. You’re entitled to your opinion and I’m not interested in trying to convince you otherwise.

It’s never going to be clever or subversive.

The AI doesn’t need to be clever for as long as the person writing the prompt is. It’s just a tool. It doesn’t do anything on its own. What you get out reflects what you put in.

I have over 10 accounts, though I only use one at a time. When I get to 1000 - 1500 comments, I abandon it and make a new one. Had to deal with a stalker in the past and I’m never putting my entire comment history under a single username ever again.

It doesn’t - you only notice the low-effort ones that default to the generic style where as the rest fly under your radar and go undetected. It’s called a toupee fallacy: “All toupees look fake, I’ve never seen one that didn’t”

That slightly poor wording choice was my entire point.

I’m only countering your claim where you seem to be suggesting that the term AGI was made up to market LLMs. It wasn’t - that term has existed for a long time.

The term AGI was coined far before LLMs even existed.

The term AGI was first used in 1997 by Mark Avrum Gubrud in an article named ‘Nanotechnology and international security’

By advanced artificial general intelligence, I mean AI systems that rival or surpass the human brain in complexity and speed, that can acquire, manipulate and reason with general knowledge, and that are usable in essentially any phase of industrial or military operations where a human intelligence would otherwise be needed. Such systems may be modeled on the human brain, but they do not necessarily have to be, and they do not have to be “conscious” or possess any other competence that is not strictly relevant to their application. What matters is that such systems can be used to replace human brains in tasks ranging from organizing and running a mine or a factory to piloting an airplane, analyzing intelligence data or planning a battle.

I don’t see the issue. I have a friend I hang out with once a year for a day and we don’t talk eachother a single word for the remaining time.

LLM are unable to become AGI.

You could not possibly know that. You’re attributing to it a probability of zero and zero is an extreme number. Unlikely is a claim you can defend. Zero you cannot.

They want AGI, not LLMs. They’re pretty much betting everything on getting there first knowing that if they do it’ll pay them back a millionfold what they invested up front. They’re taking a massive risk for a potentially massive reward. They’re coaching a college kid to become a professional athlete. It’s not profitable yet but they’re investing heavily in them in the hopes that one day it will be.

After that, it starts going downhill.

No study suggests this. It keeps going up - you’re just hitting diminishing returns.

Having financial security eases with financial worries to an extent but doesn’t entirely solve even that issue nor does it even begin to deal with the unrelated issues. One can be financially secure and absolutely miserable.

Bold claim considering there is no agreed upon definition on what we even mean by the term intelligence.

• The ability to acquire, understand, and use knowledge.
• the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
• the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one’s environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (such as tests)
• the act of understanding
• the ability to learn, understand, and make judgments or have opinions that are based on reason
• It can be described as the ability to perceive or infer information; and to retain it as knowledge to be applied to adaptive behaviors within an environment or context.