He doesn’t seem to understand his own creation. AI cannot think, it cannot have a thought or an idea, and it cannot understand. He thinks AI being better at math than him is spooky, as if calculators haven’t existed for his whole life.
Neuro has a memory, and she generates her own responses based on her memories of her experiences. Is that not the very definition of a personality? While Neuro may not be able to think in the traditional sense, you have to remember that she isn't human, and does not have to qualify with the same criteria as a human. Id argue that a her generating a response, or using her memory to come up with a topic of conversation is the equivalent of a human brain thinking, even if her AI is not quite as complex and powerful as a human brain.
@@OwlpineYT I never mentioned a personality, but I don't think she can truly be said to have one either, at least not in the way living beings do. If neuro's memory counts as one, than so does your PC's RAM. AI is incapable of holding a sincere belief or opinion. All it can do is pretend, mimicking what it has determined someone might say given its context and "memories." There is no intentionality behind anything it generates. If you ask an AI why it said something, it may retroactively justify it, but it cannot truly explain its thought process because it did not have one. If you rewind that AI and ask it to explain again, it can end up explaining its actions in a completely different way. All this is completely incomparable to a human brain. All AI can do is superficially mimic what a human brain can produce, it's why AI cannot create art. Saying that this is equivalent to thought is an insult to all of humanity and yourself.
That's a pretty wordy way to say you think humans/animals are the only beings capable of having real thoughts and minds. Why is it that a completely different type of intelligence like a machine can't have true thoughts just because it doesn't do it in a strictly human sense?
@ AI as it exists clearly is not thinking. As I said, if you ask an AI why it did or said something, then roll it back and ask the same question again, you could get tons of different justifications, often ones that are incompatible with each other. Do you think AI is just messing with us? That it actually does have some secret reason for what it says, but it just feels like making something else up on the spot? I don't think it's necessarily impossible for actual artificial intelligence to exist and be capable of thought, but if something like that did exist, it surely wouldn't need to superficially mimic the result of actual human thought. It would be able to construct its own thoughts and ideas from the ground up and experience them in its mind and explain them consistently and coherently, not just post hoc justify its actions by guessing which word is likely to come next like current AI does.
That makes sense, AI as it is now isn't that "Intelligent" in a human sense. Time will tell whether it can develop to the point of forming a mind advanced enough to be considered "alive".
![Neuro-sama | 25 Dec 2024 | Subathon 2 [20] (SOMA, Minecraft, Sleeping)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/j1ILN269VnA/mqdefault.jpg)
![Neuro-sama | 25 Dec 2024 | Subathon 2 [20] (SOMA, Minecraft, Sleeping)](/img/tr.png)
![Neuro-sama | 29 Dec 2024 | Subathon 2 [31] (Chatting, Development, Buckshot Roulette)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tscePLilFQA/mqdefault.jpg)
7:34 Minecraft starts
⬆️⬆️⬆️
*Real human bean*
3:28:25 Neuro starts sleeping
0:00 video starts
He doesn’t seem to understand his own creation. AI cannot think, it cannot have a thought or an idea, and it cannot understand. He thinks AI being better at math than him is spooky, as if calculators haven’t existed for his whole life.
Neuro has a memory, and she generates her own responses based on her memories of her experiences. Is that not the very definition of a personality? While Neuro may not be able to think in the traditional sense, you have to remember that she isn't human, and does not have to qualify with the same criteria as a human. Id argue that a her generating a response, or using her memory to come up with a topic of conversation is the equivalent of a human brain thinking, even if her AI is not quite as complex and powerful as a human brain.
@@OwlpineYT I never mentioned a personality, but I don't think she can truly be said to have one either, at least not in the way living beings do. If neuro's memory counts as one, than so does your PC's RAM. AI is incapable of holding a sincere belief or opinion. All it can do is pretend, mimicking what it has determined someone might say given its context and "memories." There is no intentionality behind anything it generates. If you ask an AI why it said something, it may retroactively justify it, but it cannot truly explain its thought process because it did not have one. If you rewind that AI and ask it to explain again, it can end up explaining its actions in a completely different way. All this is completely incomparable to a human brain. All AI can do is superficially mimic what a human brain can produce, it's why AI cannot create art. Saying that this is equivalent to thought is an insult to all of humanity and yourself.
That's a pretty wordy way to say you think humans/animals are the only beings capable of having real thoughts and minds. Why is it that a completely different type of intelligence like a machine can't have true thoughts just because it doesn't do it in a strictly human sense?
@ AI as it exists clearly is not thinking. As I said, if you ask an AI why it did or said something, then roll it back and ask the same question again, you could get tons of different justifications, often ones that are incompatible with each other. Do you think AI is just messing with us? That it actually does have some secret reason for what it says, but it just feels like making something else up on the spot?
I don't think it's necessarily impossible for actual artificial intelligence to exist and be capable of thought, but if something like that did exist, it surely wouldn't need to superficially mimic the result of actual human thought. It would be able to construct its own thoughts and ideas from the ground up and experience them in its mind and explain them consistently and coherently, not just post hoc justify its actions by guessing which word is likely to come next like current AI does.
That makes sense, AI as it is now isn't that "Intelligent" in a human sense. Time will tell whether it can develop to the point of forming a mind advanced enough to be considered "alive".