If MS cap expenditures are more than their payroll, it would seem at a glance that AI solutions are more expensive than hiring humans? Seems about right. At best this tech is an added cost, not a replacement for employees. Currently trying to replace an employee with AI is about as logical as trying to replace a drywaller with a cordless drill. A cordless drill makes hanging drywall more efficient, it doesn’t replace your worker.
I've thought about it a bit more. What was the training regime? Did they train to groking? I wonder if they take to memorisation but not long enough for that phase change to understanding.
Think we're past the point where those finding definitions to rule AI not intelligent are coming up with definitions that would rule out people as intelligent.
Hello! Thanks for your valuable content, i learned so much! Btw: i think i found a way to enable temporal reasoning and real time self awareness. Its crazy i cant stop testing
Another "the grapes are bitter" paper. This is like "free will doesn't exist." BS definition, BS irrelevant conclusion. People don't have free will, but they act like they do. Same here, Neuronal networks are not intelligent, but they behave like they do. And this is all that matters. I can't prove that anybody else than me is sentient, but as long as you guys behave like you are sentient, that's all that matters. Hehe ❤
Well its better than having the constant hype of AI and LLM's being something more than they really are. We need more sober research that give us an alternative view. In terms of free will or sentience, I think we are very far from answering that when it comes to the current AI.
You decide what and whom to believe. The company that sells you the product or other sources. Therefore: Do not continue to think about my video or read the Research by three universities. You know it better.
Regurgitation isn't intelligence. I have asked many of the best AI systems questions whose answers require synthesis and none have been capable of doing so. Furthermore, they usually reveal how poorly they were trained and refer to theories by others as facts.
@@context_eidolon_music How is it garbage content? In my opinion this is a very important question to have some answer to. There is too much hype in the AI space and too many people wishing for something that may not be possible.
Thank you for sharing this publications. As someone working on mechanistic interpretability this gave me a few ideas.
If MS cap expenditures are more than their payroll, it would seem at a glance that AI solutions are more expensive than hiring humans? Seems about right. At best this tech is an added cost, not a replacement for employees.
Currently trying to replace an employee with AI is about as logical as trying to replace a drywaller with a cordless drill.
A cordless drill makes hanging drywall more efficient, it doesn’t replace your worker.
AI is like C vs assembly. It can save you a bunch of time but you still need a human doing the work.
Can they define intelligence first. Secondly, can they show how human brain works and show that intelligence.
I've thought about it a bit more. What was the training regime? Did they train to groking? I wonder if they take to memorisation but not long enough for that phase change to understanding.
Think we're past the point where those finding definitions to rule AI not intelligent are coming up with definitions that would rule out people as intelligent.
Hello! Thanks for your valuable content, i learned so much!
Btw: i think i found a way to enable temporal reasoning and real time self awareness. Its crazy i cant stop testing
I am also fragile to detours
Another "the grapes are bitter" paper.
This is like "free will doesn't exist."
BS definition, BS irrelevant conclusion.
People don't have free will, but they act like they do. Same here, Neuronal networks are not intelligent, but they behave like they do. And this is all that matters.
I can't prove that anybody else than me is sentient, but as long as you guys behave like you are sentient, that's all that matters. Hehe ❤
Well its better than having the constant hype of AI and LLM's being something more than they really are. We need more sober research that give us an alternative view. In terms of free will or sentience, I think we are very far from answering that when it comes to the current AI.
They do realize that Anthropic has an entire series of articles on this? I don't trust this study
You decide what and whom to believe. The company that sells you the product or other sources. Therefore: Do not continue to think about my video or read the Research by three universities. You know it better.
What was Anthropic's conclusion? I tend to agree with this paper.
@@code4AI Stop producing garbage tier content if you aren't going to take a stance.
Regurgitation isn't intelligence. I have asked many of the best AI systems questions whose answers require synthesis and none have been capable of doing so. Furthermore, they usually reveal how poorly they were trained and refer to theories by others as facts.
@@context_eidolon_music How is it garbage content? In my opinion this is a very important question to have some answer to. There is too much hype in the AI space and too many people wishing for something that may not be possible.