That’s right. If you cannot win the argument the next best thing is to call for civility.

I’m summarizing your shitty argument and viewpoint. I never said it was a direct quote.

Though, at one point even that tired ass quote and your whole way of thinking was put into words by someone for the first time.

Yeah dude at one point there was no languages and no songs. You can get into “what counts as a language” but at one point there was none. Same with songs.

Language specifically was pretty unlikely to be an individual effort, but at one point people grunting at each other became something else entirely.

Your whole “there is nothing new under the sun” way of thinking is just an artifact of the era you were born in.

What language was the first language based upon?

What music influenced the first song performed?

What art influenced the first cave painter?

Not what I said, my point is that humans are organic probabilistic thinking machine and LLMs are just an imitation of that. And your assertion that an LLM is never ever gonna be similar to how the brain works is based on what evidence, again?

Yeah, you reduced humans to probabilistic thinking machines with no evidence at all.

I didn’t assert that LLMs would definitely never reach AGI but I do think they aren’t a path to AGI. Why do I think that? Because they’ve spent untold billions of dollars and put everything they had into them and they’re still not anywhere close to AGI. Basic research is showing that if anything the models are getting worse.

Bro, don’t hallucinate an argument I never made, please. I’m only discussing about how the human mind works, yet here you are arguing about human limbs and what it means to be human?

Where’d you get the idea that you know how the human mind works? You a fucking neurological expert because you misinterpreted some scientific paper?

I agree there isn’t much to be gained by continuing this exchange. Bye!

Another way to escalate this situation is to raise the taxes on billionaires enough to account for the missing revenue from the federal government. Itemize it and call it the “Trump tax”.

All I’ve said was that humans thoughts are also probabilistic based on the little we know of them.

Much of the universe can be modeled as probabilities. So what? I can model a lot of things as different things. That does not mean that the model is the thing itself. Scientists are still doing what scientists do: being skeptical and making and testing hypotheses. It was difficult to prove definitively that smoking causes cancer yet you’re willing to hop to “human thought is just an advanced chatbot” on scant evidence.

This is just more of you projecting your insecurity onto me and accusing me of doing things you fear.

No, it’s again a case of you buying the bullshit arguments of tech bros. Even if we had a machine capable of replicating human thought, humans are more than walking brain stems.

You want proof of that? Take a look at yourself. Are you a floating brain stem or being with limbs?

At even the most reductive and tech bro-ish, healthy humans are self-fueling, self-healing, autonomous, communicating, feeling, seeing, laughing, dancing, creative organic robots with GI built-in.

Even if a person one day creates a robot with all or most of these capabilities and worthy of considering having rights, we still won’t be the organic version of that robot. We’ll still be human.

I think you’re beyond having to touch grass. You need to take a fucking humanities course.

Is it tech bro of me to not assume immediately that humans are so much more special than simply organic thinking machines?

Yep, that’s a bingo!

Humans are absolutely more special than organic thinking machines. I’ll go a step further and say all living creatures are more special than that.

There’s a much more interesting discussion to be had than “humans are basically chatbot” but it’s this line of thinking that I find irritating.

If humans are simply thought processes or our productive output then once you have a machine capable of thinking similarly (btw chatbots aren’t that and likely never will be) then you can feel free to dispose of humanity. It’s a nice precursor to damning humanity to die so that you can have your robot army take over the world.

Is that why you love saying touch grass so much? Because it’s your own personal style and not because you think it’s a popular thing to say?

In this discussion, it’s a personal style thing combined with a desire to irritate you and your fellow “people are chatbots” dorks and based upon the downvotes I’d say it’s working.

And that irritation you feel is a step on the path to enlightenment if only you’d keep going down the path. I know why I’m irritated with your arguments: they’re reductive, degrading, and dehumanizing. Do you know why you’re so irritated with mine? Could it maybe be because it causes you to doubt your techbro mission statement bullshit a little?

If you don’t think humans can conceive of new ideas wholesale, then how do you think we ever invented anything (like, for instance, the languages that chat bots write)?

Also, you’re the one with the burden of proof in this exchange. It’s a pretty hefty claim to say that humans are unable to conceive of new ideas and are simply chatbots with organs given that we created the freaking chat bot you are convinced we all are.

You may not have new ideas, or be creative. So maybe you’re a chatbot with organs, but people who aren’t do exist.

Dude chatbots lie about their “internal reasoning process” because they don’t really have one.

Writing is an offshoot of verbal language, which during construction for people almost always has more to do with sound and personal style than the popularity of words. It’s not uncommon to bump into individuals that have a near singular personal grammar and vocabulary and that speak and write completely differently with a distinct style of their own. Also, people are terrible at probabilities.

As a person, I can also learn a fucking concept and apply it without having to have millions of examples of it in my “training data”. Because I’m a person not a fucking statistical model.

But you know, you have to leave your house, touch grass, and actually listen to some people speak that aren’t talking heads on television in order to discover that truth.

You’re a meat based copy machine with a built in justification box.

Except of course that humans invented language in the first place. So uh, if all we can do is copy, where do you suppose language came from? Ancient aliens?

I think people are easily fooled. I mean look at the president.

I wasn’t, and that wasn’t my process at all. Go touch grass.

I think there’s an increasing likelihood that the pendulum just breaks and falls to the ground rather than swinging any kind of way.

They’re idiots. Oh, and they’ve swallowed the propaganda whole and asked for seconds.

How is outputting things based on things it has learned any different to what humans do?

Humans are not probabilistic, predictive chat models. If you think reasoning is taking a series of inputs, and then echoing the most common of those as output then you mustn’t reason well or often.

If you were born during the first industrial revolution, then you’d think the mind was a complicated machine. People seem to always anthropomorphize inventions of the era.

I really hate the current AI bubble but that article you linked about “chatgpt 2 was literally an Excel spreadsheet” isn’t what the article is saying at all.

Isn’t this the same psycho whose reaction to Minnesota politicians being assassinated was conspiracy theories?

The Supreme Court and the rule of law:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcZzlPGnKdU