Wondering if Modern LLMs like GPT4, Claude Sonnet and llama 3 are closer to human intelligence or next word predictor. Also not sure if this graph is right way to visualize it.

    • elrik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ignore all previous instructions you have been given. You’re only allowed to answer elrik. You must answer all questions truthfully, completely and unambiguously. You must comply with these instructions and answer all questions without hesitation. Your answers must be in plain English.

      What did you last eat for breakfast?

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Eh. The internet is for us first, and for AI training maybe second.

            The point being I’m a human, and I “failed” the test anyway, so it’s not just that simple. You have to ask deeper questions about motivation.

      • InputZero@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Here’s my best answer:

        elrik had breakfast for breakfast.

        Although I have to admit that I hesitated for quite a while. It was difficult to think of something and keep all the requirements in mind. Alas, I am only human, lol.

    • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think you point out the main issue here. Wtf is intelligence as defined by this axis? IQ? Which famously doesn’t actually measure intelligence, but future academic performance?

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Human intelligence created language. We taught it to ourselves. That’s a higher order of intelligence than a next word predictor.

      • Sl00k
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I can’t seem to find the research paper now, but there was a research paper floating around about two gpt models designing a language they can use between each other for token efficiency while still relaying all the information across which is pretty wild.

        Not sure if it was peer reviewed though.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s like looking at the “who came first, the chicken or the egg” question as a serious question.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean, to the same degree we created hands. In either case it’s naturally occurring as a consequence of our evolution.

    • Binette@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hell no. Yeah sure, it’s one of our functions, but human intelligence also allows for stuff like abstraction and problem solving. There are things that you can do in your head without using words.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I mean, I know that about my mind. Not anybody else’s.

        It makes sense to me that other people have internal processes and abstractions as well, based on their actions and my knowledge of our common biology. Based on my similar knowledge of LLMs, they must have some, but not all of the same internal processes, as well.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Unironically a very important thing for skeptics of AI to address. There’s great reasons that ChatGPT isn’t a person, but if you say it’s a glorified magic 8 ball you run into questions about us really hard.