We're choosing to call LLMs (and the little "harness" programs that query them in loops and execute their output) "AI", even though it doesn't make much sense.

They fucking solve original math problems that you can't solve. They are indisputably intelligent, and they are indisputably artificial. That makes them indisputably "artificial intelligence." Denying that (or downvoting it, for that matter) is up there with denying evolution and the Moon landings.

It's time to start flying a different flag. You're making humans look stupid.

It turned out to be possible with fairly basic statistical text generation, because fooling humans is easy.

Yes, fooling humans is easy. Yet somehow we still consider ourselves qualified to say what is "intelligent" and what isn't, even though we can't seem to define the term.

▲

_doctor_love 2 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

dang 2 days ago | parent [-]

Personal attacks aren't allowed here.

As I just mentioned at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48981624, we need you to stick to HN's rules if you want to keep commenting on the site.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

	▲	CamperBob2 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It's a semi-valid reply to deliberately-provocative phrasing on my part, I suppose. I'm over it, don't ban him. :) I do wish that people who aren't interested in, engaged with, and informed about technical progress in AI would find someplace else to signal their disinterest, disengagement, and disregard. But that's admittedly a me problem and not an HN problem.
	▲	_doctor_love 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Please see my other reply to you on this.