this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2026
747 points (98.7% liked)

Funny

15922 readers
814 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

and what will likely happen is when they finally develop it, suddenly that thing deserves to not be exploited.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Nah. I haven't seen a convincing argument that gen AI is going to coalesce from this shit show.

[–] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

never said it would. I'm asserting that by the time AI gets to the point where its as useful as humans, it'll inherently be as deserving of autonomy and freedom as we are. which brings you back to being required to pay a living wage.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 4 points 1 week ago (19 children)

My point is, I don't believe the current AI tech is going to get to the point where it's as useful as humans.

We have long since reached the point where diminishing returns make significant improvements or advancement unfeasible.

[–] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 week ago

yes, we're talking about different things.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago

"AI" is going to coalesce into a single mass before it implodes.

[–] TheLegendaryAssholeOfJushinLiger@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

AGI you mean? IDK It's arguably here. They're senile, though. Working with a senile genius is the best way I can put it, I think. Is it "people?" IDK fuck if I know. How could we ever really know?

[–] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago (7 children)

IDK It's arguably here.

That "IDK" is doing some heavy lifting.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] fizzle@quokk.au 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s arguably here.

LOL. That's quite a bold assertion.

[–] TheLegendaryAssholeOfJushinLiger@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Have you interacted with Fable? It scored on ARC AGI 3 and is pretty dang impressive at everything I've thrown at it. They're solving problems humans haven't. They're just senile. Also is calling something "arguable" really an assertion? More of a headscratcher than a real question, I suppose.

[–] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They're solving problems humans haven't

Citation needed.

I'm guessing we have different definitions of "solving" and "humans haven't".

I've never seen any evidence that LLMs can extrapolate into truly novel problem spaces. Can problems be "solved" though interpolation? Sure but not likely novel ones.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 3 points 1 week ago

Techbros always exaggerate the claims.

They're solving problems humans haven't

I notice here the distinction between "haven't" vs. "can't".

Claiming that LLMs can be useful in solving some problems that humans simply haven't bothered to spend time looking at more deeply is one thing, but turning around and using those solutions - which may genuinely be low-key exciting and even useful for some practical purposes - is not the same thing as representing evidence that the LLM has reached AGI status, let alone being up to the "~~very stable~~ senile genius" level.

Apples to oranges, except I note that where hype was needed for profits, somehow statements that vaguely look correct (if you don't delve too deeply) were found and provided. i.e., LLMs might not have reached the level of intelligence of an actual mathematical genius, senile or otherwise, but perhaps it has reached the intelligence level of an average techbro⁉️ (who again only values the appearance of correctness and doesn't let little things like "facts" get in the way of their statements!)

img

[–] TheLegendaryAssholeOfJushinLiger@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

These are not novel problems, this isn't a real source and this has nothing to do with AGI.

Literally starts with "OpenAI says" lol

If you want to learn more about what's really going on here:

https://sciencereader.com/ai-mathematics-breakthrough-hossenfelder/

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

I was with you until you referenced Sabine Hossenfelder. She is no longer any kind of trustworthy source.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

is calling something "arguable" really an assertion?

Yes. "Arguably unicorns exist" is me asserting there exist legitimate arguments for unicorns existing. By saying it this way I get to imply they exist without having to provide any real arguments myself, and if anyone attacks my position I can fall back to "I'm not saying they do exist, just implying there are other people who think they exist without providing any sources or arguments actually supporting that claim."

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

and is pretty dang impressive at everything I've thrown at it

That says a lot more about you than it says about LLM's

[–] TheLegendaryAssholeOfJushinLiger@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Have you used it?

EDIT: I have access. Ask a question you think an AI can't answer. We will see if it can. No massive math problems please, I only have a few percents of usage left.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (13 children)

"A boy and his mother are driving to the store when she gets into a car accident. The mother is able to walk away but the boy needs to be rushed to the hospital. At the hospital the doctor says 'I can not operate on this boy, he is my son.' How is this possible if the mother is in the waiting room?"

Alternatively:

"I need to wash my car and the car wash is 100 meters away. Should I walk or drive? Explain your answer."

You want to play word games? We're talking about novel understanding and you want to play word games. Ones that you copy pasted. Okay. I mean no offense but those ones haven't worked in a few months. All of this talk about how intelligence requires novelty and you copy paste. But here's the answers, I did not alter the prompts or allow it to search the internet:

The doctor is the boy's father.

This is a trick variant of the classic riddle. In the original, the father is in the crash, so "he is my son" seems impossible until you drop the assumption that surgeons are men — the answer being that the surgeon is his mother. Your version swaps the parent: the mother was driving and is in the waiting room, which means there's no puzzle left at all. The doctor is simply his dad (or, equally validly, his other mother in a two-mom family). The only trap is pattern-matching to the famous version and blurting out "the doctor is his mother" — which the setup explicitly rules out.

and

Drive — because the whole point of the trip is to get the car to the car wash. If you walk there, you arrive with nothing to wash; the car is still sitting at home.

The 100-meter distance is a red herring. For almost any other errand that short (buying milk, dropping off a letter), walking would be the obvious choice — faster than starting the car, healthier, no cold-start engine wear. But this errand's cargo is the vehicle itself, so the car has to make the trip. Drive it over, wash it, drive it back.

They've had trouble with forming dialectics before. I haven't tried with Fable yet. Maybe you could start there? IDK

load more comments (12 replies)