←back to thread

LLMs understand nullability

(dmodel.ai)
169 points mattmarcus | 1 comments | 07 Apr 25 14:52 UTC | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
nativeit ◴[07 Apr 25 16:06 UTC] No.43613007[source]▶
We’re all just elementary particles being clumped together in energy gradients, therefore my little computer project is sentient—this is getting absurd.
replies(4): >>43613040 #>>43613242 #>>43613636 #>>43613675 #
nativeit ◴[07 Apr 25 16:09 UTC] No.43613040[source]▶
Sorry, this is more about the discussion of this article than the article itself. The moving goal posts that acolytes use to declare consciousness are becoming increasingly cult-y.
replies(2): >>43613083 #>>43613334 #
wongarsu ◴[07 Apr 25 16:14 UTC] No.43613083[source]▶
We spent 40 years moving the goal posts on what constitutes AI. Now we seem to have found an AI worthy of that title and instead start moving the goal posts on "consciousness", "understanding" and "intelligence".
replies(7): >>43613139 #>>43613150 #>>43613171 #>>43613259 #>>43613347 #>>43613368 #>>43613468 #
1. Sohcahtoa82 ◴[07 Apr 25 16:33 UTC] No.43613259[source]▶
> We spent 40 years moving the goal posts on what constitutes AI.

Who is "we"?

I think of "AI" as a pretty all-encompassing term. ChatGPT is AI, but so is the computer player in the 1995 game Command and Conquer, among thousands of other games. Heck, I might even call the ghosts in Pac-man "AI", even if their behavior is extremely simple, predictable, and even exploitable once you understand it.