• @Soyweiser
    link
    English
    10
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Yes, and that was a stupid argument unrelated to the point made that evolution used this raw data to do things, thus raw data in LLMs will lead to AGI. You just wanted debate points for ‘see somewhere there is data in the process of things being alive’. Which is dumb gotcha logic which drags all of us down and makes it harder to have normal conversations about things. My reply was an attempt to make you see this and hope you would do better.

    I didn’t call you stupid, I called the argument stupid, but if the shoe fits.

    E: the argument from the person before you ‘evolution was created us with a lot of data and then we created the internet’ is also silly of course, as if you just go ‘well raw data created evolution’ then no matter how we would get AGI (say it is build out of post quantum computers in 2376) this line of reasoning would say it comes from raw data, so the whole conversation devolves into saying nothing.

    • @froztbyte
      link
      English
      116 months ago

      No no see, since everything is information this argument totally holds up. That one would need to categorize and order it for it to be data is such a silly notion, utterly ridiculous and unnecessary! Just throw some information in the pool and stir, it’ll evolve soon enough!

      • @mountainriver
        link
        English
        76 months ago

        The number of rocks in my garden is information. Yet, despite counting them all, I have not found AGI. So I must need more information than that.

        Clearly, counting all the rocks in Wales should do it. So much counting.

    • @o7___o7
      link
      English
      76 months ago

      it was straight up “not even wrong”