>>189213
First of all, I hear this alot, people say LLms "aren't true AI". Sure, so what?

This fake AI, or whatever you want to call it, can outperform you in every single metric. Does your "real" intelligence matter if you would lose to AI in every single exam?

>The vast majority of people don't have the willpower to fight back. That doesn't mean anything.
How does that not mean anything?

>Shut up. I hate this rhetoric because it shifts the LLM debate into something completely different from technology. Yeah sure, societal changes are beyond any single individual's control, but the argument against generating things with LLMs was never about that.
This post is precisely about societal change and AI. The argument against generating things with LLM is entirely because of the societal changes it causes. At least thats the rationale in 99% of people

>What is the value of art? Is art inherently valuable? Is art valuable because it has a labor component, and the product of labor is valuable? Is art valuable because it makes you feel things? You can pull an entire debate just from this topic, but I don't think certain people hire humans to make their art when LLMs exist because of "value" or "method of its creation" (labor).
For all intents and purposes, art is what sells. Sure, there is no scientific definition of good art, but its not an uncommon metric to judge the goodness of something by it bringing the greatest amount of pleasure to the greatest amount of people. Maybe that means the minions is one of humanities greatest films, maybe it means some 70s porno is greater than some niche french film that critics say is the greatest thing ever made. Mass appeal is a quantifiable metric for judging art, and it has more weight than quality, which cannot be subjectively measured.

>None of that is new and are already happening, have you never seen those cases of people having a romantic relationship with ChatGPT or Gemini, after a bad divorce or something? Also go to friend.com, I think you'll like it.
None of that is new? What world have you been living in? This stuff has only been possible for a few years at best


>We'll see when it actually happens. Whatever we have right now is not "AI" in the slightest. Intelligence is not just about pattern recognition, in fact I think most mammals can do that just fine, yet only we humans are regarded as "intelligent", as far as we know. LLM-based chatbots like ChatGPT and Gemini do nothing more than predict with high accuracy the next part of a sentence, which tricks you (the chatbot itself isn't purposefuly "tricking" anyone, it's all you) into thinking it is intelligent, because the only kind of intelligence we know is human intelligence. Humans like to write a lot, and we consider people that can write well to be highly literate, therefore highly intelligent.
See my first response. This is, ultimately, cope. True, LLMs function very differently from human minds. So what? It's capabilities are no less impressive. AI has just solved 10 previously unsolved questions in math
https://openai.com/index/ten-advances-in-mathematics/


>This whole thing is a grift dude, a scam. There are billionaires, trillionaires, politicians making huge bucks from this. It's all fake, built on a technology that was never created to do what it is being most used for right now. It's not that deep.

This reads like wishful thinking. You don't want to live in a world with AI, so you come up with reasons why you aren't. You'll be left in the dust, your denial will only be comforting up to a point. And not sometime in the distant future. I don't know what will be your breaking point, maybe when you educate yourself on AI more. Already such denial borders on delusion.