starting out[0] with “I was surprised by the following results” and it just goes further down almost-but-not-quite Getting It Avenue

close, but certainly no cigar

choice quotes:

Why is it impressive that a model trained on internet text full of random facts happens to have a lot of random facts memorized? … why does that in any way indicate intelligence or creativity?

That’s a good point.

you don’t fucking say

I have a website (TrackingAI.org) that already administers a political survey to AIs every day. So I could easily give the AIs a real intelligence test, and track that over time, too.

really, how?

As I started manually giving AIs IQ tests

oh.

Then it proceeds to mis-identify every single one of the 6 answer options, leading it to pick the wrong answer. There seems to be little rhyme or reason to its misidentifications

if this fuckwit had even the slightest fucking understanding of how these things work, it would be glaringly obvious

there’s plenty more, so remember to practice stretching before you start your eyerolls

  • @swlabr
    link
    English
    164 months ago

    On their substack the author claims they are “doing non-ideological […] reporting”, which means they are definitely doing ideological reporting. Let’s see…

    next most recent post titled “the dawn of woke ai” says pretty much what you’ll guess it does from the title. It also features the AI rendered POC nazis from a bit back as evidence of “woke”ness… Fun!

    • @Evinceo
      link
      English
      174 months ago
      • SubStack
      • “Maximum Truth”

      can I discard someone’s opinion twice?

      • @Soyweiser
        link
        English
        114 months ago

        “The Dawn of Woke AI”

        Can I do it thrice?

    • @froztbyteOP
      link
      English
      10
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I didn’t even go exploring. on the one hand I feel this is good (in the sense that it didn’t depress me even more), on the other it would’ve made the who clear earlier