Post #2821022

2026-04-16 14:08 UTC

In the case of 'artificial general intelligence’, if it ever arrives (and I don't see why it can’t, although I don't believe it’s in any way imminent), then it'll be a similarly messy kludge assembled from bits and pieces. And while I don't believe for a second that existing LLMs are in any way “intelligent", the technology underlying them is spookily good at doing SOMETHING, and that something might be a necessary part of building an intelligent system. 8/

Replies (3)

@angusm@mastodon.social 2026-04-16 14:13

This, for me, is the interesting bit of LLMs and GPTs. I'm not interested in their proven ability to spew slop (“not interested" = “I actively hate it”). Nor am I persuaded by the hypesters’ claims that their consumer-grade sycophancy-as-a-service is three point releases away from ushering in the Singularity. But it does seem that LLMs are very … well, I was going to say 'efficient', but if you have to boil the Colorado River to write a corporate mission statement, efficient isn't the word. 9/

Open ##2821023
@ddgulledge@social.linux.pizza 2026-04-16 14:51

@angusm@mastodon.social I suspect you're right about it being a part of such a system. Current LLMs are remarkably good at producing output that communicates ideas to humans. That capability is clearly useful to an AGI.

Open ##2821037
@n_dimension@infosec.exchange 2026-04-16 14:54

@angusm@mastodon.social You seem to be making the assumption that "intelligence" has to follow human evolutionary trajectory. I think intelligence is possible without consciousness, and perhaps that may be the most terrifying aspect of #Ai

Open ##2821038