Silentiea

I mean, you can make a smallish one as long as you don't live anywhere that gets too hot or cold.

They're not even, they're measured in bits per second. That's like saying temperature is measured in calories.

I mean there's magnetic tape. It's not, like, usable. But it's also none too volatile if stored properly.

But you don't really "know" anything either. You just have a network of relations stored in the fatty juice inside your skull that gets excited just the right way when I ask it a question, and it wasn't set up that way by any "intelligence", the links were just randomly assembled based on weighted reactions to the training data (i.e. all the stimuli you've received over your life).

Thinking about how a thing works is, imo, the wrong way to think about if something is "intelligent" or "knows stuff". The mechanism is neat to learn about, but it's not what ultimately decides if you know something. It's much more useful to think about whether it can produce answers, especially given novel inquiries, which is where an LLM distinguishes itself from a book or even a typical search engine.

And again, I'm not trying to argue that an LLM is intelligent, just that whether it is or not won't be decided by talking about the mechanism of its "thinking"

Real intelligence simply doesn't work like this

There's a certain point where this just feels like the Chinese room. And, yeah, it's hard to argue that a room can speak Chinese, or that the weird prediction rules that an LLM is built on can constitute intelligence, but that doesn't mean it can't be. Essentially boiled down, every brain we know of is just following weird rules that happen to produce intelligent results.

Obviously we're nowhere near that with models like this now, and it isn't something we have the ability to work directly toward with these tools, but I would still contend that intelligence is emergent, and arguing whether something "knows" the answer to a question is infinitely less valuable than asking whether it can produce the right answer when asked.

The complaint listed in the text was that it "refused to generate white people in any context", which was not the author's experience, hence they shared screens of their results which did include white americans

The word cis or cisgender is right there my friend. Trans people are still biological, after all.

How dare you cook dinner for yourself when McDonald's is right there? How will the franchise owners or the brand owners be able to buy meals for their children!?

I mean it's still possibly copyright and/or trademark infringement, but...

I mean I always knew digital renting was kind of a lame idea, but I didn't put together how monumentally bad it is until you said that...

I mean I do.

I mean the odds aren't very different for the kid after the procedure. Why can't God save them after? Not even /s, why don't they ever have an answer for that? If we're relying on a miracle anyway, why would an infinitely powerful god need such constrained circumstances to make it work?