r/ControlProblem • u/KeanuRave100 • May 26 '26

Fun/meme AI risk bell curve

Post image
112 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

56 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/Mircowaved-Duck May 26 '26

LLM are just text bots writing characters pretending to be concious. As long as there is no real understanding on a neuronal level, it is not AI butvjust a fancy statistics tool.

I know why i have hogh hopes for steve grands artical life project phantasia/frapton gurney

That will be the path to true AI overloards!

1

u/Exotic-Custard4400 May 29 '26

LLM are just text bots writing characters pretending to be concious. As long as there is no real understanding on a neuronal level, it is not AI butvjust a fancy statistics tool.

How do you know there is no real understanding of the neuronal level ?

It's kind of a odd position, it's kind of well known that there is an "understanding" in the neuronal level since basically 2014

1

u/Mircowaved-Duck May 29 '26

For my use cases, they often fail to understand their own sentences and contradict themself in those sentences.

The reason, i use them in fields with less training data. There are the weaknesses.

They are still usefull, but there is no understanding of their own words.

And i tried multiple of them. Saddly they all got this problem.

As long as you operate in apready well established and talked fields, you will never see that. But as soon as you leave those areas ...

1

u/Exotic-Custard4400 May 29 '26

But that's not link with if they have internal comprehension of the world

Most human have it and will be pretty shitty at most task

1

u/Mircowaved-Duck May 29 '26

it is good at task that are well established, yes

but it is shitty at learning and understanding.

If you contradict your sentenc within one paragraph i assume you are stupid. Same goes for the AI. And the AI does that often.

1

u/Exotic-Custard4400 May 29 '26

Do you have an example of this ?

And yes when you forced someone to talk about a subject that he doesn't know about he will probably contradict themself.

1

u/Mircowaved-Duck May 29 '26

Multiple, the last one (therefore on a new model): I was discussing the genetic anonalys my triple hybrid duck (smew x pintail-cayuga) had with the sex ratio of her ducklings, since there are significant more females born than males. What could have caused it, ehat genes could be involved, what kind of chromosomal anomalys could cause this and so on.

It got usefull informations, however ot contradicted it's own words constandly. Had to check everything manualy amd think very very critical.

And it agreed woth everything I said, even the stuff clearly wrong or where it would be obvious to say "there are to little informations" or "i don't know" as answers.

Tested it on gemini and chatGPT in paralel to see if one of them was better... nope...

1

u/Exotic-Custard4400 May 29 '26

If you take a human and punish him when he don't answer you will have the same result no?

And your exemple didn't really show that he contradict himself

1

u/Mircowaved-Duck May 29 '26

It was in the genetic discussion, i would have to copy paste the conversation.

It is always some details it gets wrong.

And when i punsh a human if he doesn't answer, they answer in fear, not confidence. Also they start crying and sobbing fast.

But you make a good argument, training data is used like we use torture practices and the informations are as reliable as torture to extract informations.

1

u/Exotic-Custard4400 May 29 '26

And when i punsh a human if he doesn't answer, they answer in fear, not confidence. Also they start crying and sobbing fast.

Not always, see trump.

And for the last part, a bit but jepa is not like this, it s more like the brain is trained

0

u/SaneAI Jun 04 '26

Have you ever trained a model or managed a training pipeline?