• irmoz@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I couldn’t have put it better myself. You’ve said lots of philosophical words without actually addressing any of my questions:

    Did you really just pull an “I know you are, but what am I?”

    I’m not gonna entertain your attempt to pretend very concrete concepts are woollier and more complex than they are.

    If you truly believe machine learning has even begun to approach being compared to human cognition, there is no speaking to you about this subject.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUrOxh_0leE&pp=ygUQYWkgZG9lc24ndCBleGlzdA%3D%3D

    Every step of the way, a machine learning model is only making guesses based on previous training data. And not what the data actually is, but the pieces of it. Do green pixels normally go here? Does the letter “k” go here?

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      What evidence do you have that human cognition is functionally different? I won’t argue that humans are more sophisticated for sure. But what justification do you have to claim that humans aren’t just very, very good at making guesses based on previous training data?

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m sorry that you’re struggling. Perhaps if you answered any of the questions I posed (twice) in order to frame the topic in a concrete way, we could have a more productive conversation that might provide elucidation for one, or both, of us. I fail to see how continuing to ignore those core questions, and instead focusing on questions that weren’t asked, will help either one of us.