826
Apple just proved AI "reasoning" models like Claude, DeepSeek-R1, and o3-mini don't actually reason at all. They just memorize patterns really well. (archive.is)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by to c/technology@lemmy.world
336 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

LOOK MAA I AM ON FRONT PAGE

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 49 points 1 year ago (13 children)

When are people going to realize, in its current state , an LLM is not intelligent. It doesn’t reason. It does not have intuition. It’s a word predictor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Intuition is about the only thing it has. It's a statistical system. The problem is it doesn't have logic. We assume because its computer based that it must be more logic oriented but it's the opposite. That's the problem. We can't get it to do logic very well because it basically feels out the next token by something like instinct. In particular it doesn't mask or disconsider irrelevant information very well if two segments are near each other in embedding space, which doesn't guarantee relevance. So then the model is just weighing all of this info, relevant or irrelevant to a weighted feeling for the next token.

    This is the core problem. People can handle fuzzy topics and discrete topics. But we really struggle to create any system that can do both like we can. Either we create programming logic that is purely discrete or we create statistics that are fuzzy.

    Of course this issue of masking out information that is close in embedding space but is irrelevant to a logical premise is something many humans suck at too. But high functioning humans don't and we can't get these models to copy that ability. Too many people, sadly many on the left in particular, not only will treat association as always relevant but sometimes as equivalence. RE racism is assoc with nazism is assoc patriarchy is historically related to the origins of capitalism ∴ nazism ≡ capitalism. While national socialism was anti-capitalist. Associative thinking removes nuance. And sadly some people think this way. And they 100% can be replaced by LLMs today, because at least the LLM is mimicking what logic looks like better though still built on blind association. It just has more blind associations and finetune weighting for summing them. More than a human does. So it can carry that to mask as logical further than a human who is on the associative thought train can.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    People think they want AI, but they don’t even know what AI is on a conceptual level.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Yeah I often think about this Rick N Morty cartoon. Grifters are like, "We made an AI ankle!!!" And I'm like, "That's not actually something that people with busted ankles want. They just want to walk. No need for a sentient ankle." It's a real gross distortion of science how everything needs to be "AI" nowadays.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    If we ever achieved real AI the immediate next thing we would do is learn how to lobotomize it so that we can use it like a standard program or OS, only it would be suffering internally and wishing for death. I hope the basilisk is real, we would deserve it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    AI is just the new buzzword, just like blockchain was a while ago. Marketing loves these buzzwords because they can get away with charging more if they use them. They don't much care if their product even has it or could make any use of it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    They want something like the Star Trek computer or one of Tony Stark's AIs that were basically deus ex machinas for solving some hard problem behind the scenes. Then it can say "model solved" or they can show a test simulation where the ship doesn't explode (or sometimes a test where it only has an 85% chance of exploding when it used to be 100%, at which point human intuition comes in and saves the day by suddenly being better than the AI again and threads that 15% needle or maybe abducts the captain to go have lizard babies with).

    AIs that are smarter than us but for some reason don't replace or even really join us (Vision being an exception to the 2nd, and Ultron trying to be an exception to the 1st).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I agree with you. In its current state, LLM is not sentient, and thus not "Intelligence".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I think it's an easy mistake to confuse sentience and intelligence. It happens in Hollywood all the time - "Skynet began learning at a geometric rate, on July 23 2004 it became self-aware" yadda yadda

    But that's not how sentience works. We don't have to be as intelligent as Skynet supposedly was in order to be sentient. We don't start our lives as unthinking robots, and then one day - once we've finally got a handle on calculus or a deep enough understanding of the causes of the fall of the Roman empire - we suddenly blink into consciousness. On the contrary, even the stupidest humans are accepted as being sentient. Even a young child, not yet able to walk or do anything more than vomit on their parents' new sofa, is considered as a conscious individual.

    So there is no reason to think that AI - whenever it should be achieved, if ever - will be conscious any more than the dumb computers that precede it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •