OpenAI could be fined up to $150,000 for each piece of infringing content.
  • SIGSEGV@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1810·
    1 year ago

    Very much like humans do. Many people think that somehow their brain is special, but really, you’re just neurons behaving as neurons do, which can be modeled mathematically.

    • Hello Hotel@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12·
      1 year ago

      This take often denies that entropy soul or not is critically important for the types of intellegence thats not controlled by reward and punishment with an iron fist.

      • SIGSEGV@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        3·
        1 year ago

        It sounds like you know english words but cannot compose them. I honestly cannot parse what you said.

    • BURN@lemmy.worldEnglish
      57·
      1 year ago

      We can’t even map the entirety of the brain of a mouse due to the scale of how neurons work. Mapping a human brain 1:1 will eventually happen, and that’s likely going to coincide with when I’m convinced AI is capable of individual thought and actual intelligence

      • SIGSEGV@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1316·
        1 year ago

        Just saw this today. You should check it out, nitwit: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/aug/15/scientists-reconstruct-pink-floyd-song-by-listening-to-peoples-brainwaves

        Edit: “nitwit” was uncalled for, but I do think you are an ignorant person.

        You aren’t magical. You don’t have a soul that talks to Jesus. You’re a bunch of organized electrical signals—a machine. Because your machine is carbon-based doesn’t make you special.

        Edit: Downvote all you want, but we’re all still animals. Most people don’t even believe that simple fact. Then again, most people don’t even understand how their cellphone works.

        • BURN@lemmy.worldEnglish
          149·
          1 year ago

          I fundamentally disagree and if that’s your take on humanity I’m scared for our future.

          There is a human element to us. I’m not spiritual at all. I believe when we die the lights just go out and we cease to exist. But there is undoubtedly a part of us that is still far from being replicated in a machine. I’m not saying it won’t happen, I’m saying we’re a long way from it and what we’re seeing out of current AI is nothing even close to resembling intelligence.

          • SIGSEGV@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            116·
            1 year ago

            So when it happens, you’ll change your mind? My point is that what we have today is based on interactions in the human brain: neural networks. You can say, “They’re just guessing the next word based on mathematical models”, but isn’t that exactly what you’re doing?

            Point to the reason why what comes out of your mouth is any different. Is it because your network is bigger and more complicated? If that’s the case GPT-4 is closer to being human than GPT-3 was, being a larger model.

            I just don’t get your point at all.

            • PupBiru@kbin.social
              21·
              1 year ago

              and if that is indeed the point: that the difference is simply size, then what does that law look like? surely it would need to specify a size of the relevant neural network that is able to derive works

              but that’s then just an arbitrary number because we just don’t know what it would be

              • SIGSEGV@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                51·
                1 year ago

                I don’t even think that matters much, right? Current LLMs already out-compete humans at many tasks. I think we’re already past the threshold, at least in some regards. That is to say, I don’t think there is a hard line because it depends on what your testing criteria are.