791
Are you telling me they don't?
(lemmy.today)
Too spicy?
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 May 2026
791 points (100.0% liked)
memes
21339 readers
1893 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
But you assume consciousness is just computation. What if it isn't? We don't understand how brains work. Why should a computer be capable of reproducing a phenomenon we don't even understand?
Consciousness is separate from intelligence and I never brought it up.
So would you describe "statistically likely" to be the same as "intelligent"?
Statistically likely to...what? I don't understand what you're trying to say.
A large language model is giving you the statistically most likely words to your prompt, weighted by prettymuch everything written online. You would describe that as "intelligent"?
Intelligence is a description of capability, not the means by which the capability is achieved. So if the output looks intelligent then the process is intelligent regardless of how it works. The difference between natural and artificial intelligence is how the intelligence is achieved - what you're describing doesn't match any intelligence found in nature so if it produces intelligent output then it's artificially intelligent.
Most every other computer program made will also meet this definition. Hell, this definition is so loose, you can use it to describe evolution as an intelligent process.
What if I push it one step further back the chain? In so far as these programs are recognizably intelligent, it is only because conscious people put a lot of time and work into making them. Into setting up the systems that statistically weighed the models. The model is intelligent, but it's not artificially so. It's just an expression of plain old human intelligence, obfuscated through sci-fi terminology.