

Snake oil and wish fullfilment with a heavy dose of personal information data gathering/privacy invasion and addiction. That is whats going on here.
What people are actually using are probability engines. Statisical guessing machines. Nothing more. Every word and every letter is just a prediction based on the probability the next one is going to occur and fit. There is no desireable outcome that it cares about.
There is no understanding or consciousness. No decision making based on anything else, no feeling, no desire, nothing.
The term, in mathmatics and computer science is technically correct, as the field started around the late 1940’s. But this term is taken to mean far more than this and marketed as such. Hence why Trump tried to rebrand yet again with Super Intelligence, just more marketing.
These are money making schemes conflated with desire for power and a gold rush where no company wants to be late to the party. It’s an investment loop; a sleight of hand to move money.
Look at all the bullshit they build into the chatbots alone to try and humanize it: memories of you, telling you that you are very smart, agreeing by design, particularly to the point of making stuff up. The sycophany is used to drive engagement, even when the answer is wrong.





I don’t think one can object to any technology iteself, it is the implementation and details where things get problematic.
So I have objections to both the implementation of LLMs and the marketing spin of making claims that AI (as a lay person thinks about it) exists by calling it such.
I would love to have the star trek computer; impassionate answers to question asked by natural language. That part is kind of great.
But not at the expense of the environment, job insecurity, loss cognitive abilities, electricity consumption, harvesting everyones data for private gain.
We just aren’t ready to handle those challenges yet.
AI (as sold to us) is currently under the assumption that eventually, with enough resources thrown at the problem, become stable and useful. But there is no guarantee that will be true, and they are still missing the models of how reasoning should work.
Just remember, its irrelavant to this discussion, because the point I am making is that what we have today is not about intelligence in the first place, its about marketing, engagement, and making money.
But in terms of what AI we have today? Intelligence has a foundation based on knowledge, where a lot of social cues, second guesses, self regulation, intuition, and other applied behaviours. LLM’s start down a track and continue it to a conclusion. They may review their writing, add more inputs, but they again just go down the same probabalistic course.
Intelligence is knowing your limits, having tacit knowledge (judgement based on experience), generate novel concepts (AI as we have it today is likely to collapse knowledge, not contribute to it), ability to apply rationale from other fields and sources while creating conclusions, and sensory input that is not just wieghted models.
What is your definition?