this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2026
384 points (94.4% liked)
memes
22953 readers
1986 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Literally ALL (modern) AI is just fancy matrices. That's what the word AI means, and has been used for for several decades. Even a hypothetical True/General AI would be just be a wildly complex Matrix system.
In a way, the human brain is literally just an extremely fancy network of neurons that is mathematically a matrix system.
Getting upset at the term AI because "it's just matrices" is "old man yells at clouds" level of discourse
The comments in this post are wild. A ton of modern physics is also just fancy matrices. What does the math being based on matrix operations have to do with.. anything..?
Ya. You could also say our brains are just big wet, mushy containers for neurons …. Which is just a moist way of storing and processing fancy matrices.
Not quite, AI is split into three paradigms: symbolic, connectionist and semi-symbolic, you only considered the connectionist one
I misphrased, I meant to say all learning/adaptive AI systems are matrix based.
Symbolic systems are hard coded, and can't learn or adapt to new input data, they can exclusively handle inputs that were explicitly hard coded into the system. Symbolic AI systems also imo are a bit of a misnomer nowadays, as they kind of blur the line between AI and just any old programming script. Arguably any code that contains even a single "if" or "switch" statement to handle an external input is technically symbolic AI, which includes almost every type of script and program in existence, making the term somewhat useless. Input gender -> if gender = M: output "hello sir" else if gender = F: output "hello madam" else: output "hello" is a symbolic AI. and with the prevelance of trained AI nowadays, I wouldn't really consider it useful or descriptive to call symbolic systems AI, as opposed to just calling them a script/program.
Though that doesn't invalidate my general point. If you're upset about calling a complex matrix network AI because it's "just matrices" then Symbolic systems would be even less "worthy" of that term, they're just a list of "if else" statements. So my general point still stands, by OPs standards, literally nothing could ever be called AI, even a perfect simulation of an entire human brain with true artificial consciousness wouldn't be worthy of the term "AI" by OPs logic.
You cannot invalidate what is called AI just because of the advancements in the fields, what you just described although simple is indeed AI and automation was humanities first attempt at AI anyways. On the other hand yes OPs point of view is invalid and I think that's just part of the meme
Actually I can, language is fluid and changes and develops all the time, it is entirely possible for the definitions and colloquial understanding of words and terms to change and evolve as technology, science and society evolves.
And the whole point was that the term AI is useless as a term when it describes basically every computer script in existence. At that point, "AI" is no longer it's own term, and effectively just becomes a synonym for "script" or "program", which removes any utility of using it in the first place.
Well I see your point, but I'd suggest that it only stands in a casual/commercial context, research have been using it as an umbrella for the three paradigms I mentioned
As partzel points out this misses out a bunch of AI, roughly two thirds of the field infact. Including the expert systems that were the first computers to actually beat grandmasters at chess.
Built using no matrices at all.
I get upset at the term AI because obviously this is VI. Mass Effect settled this.
LLMs are just fancy autocomplete.
My point exactly
Only if you use Qubits in those calculations, assumably. It's theorized that neurons are affected by quantum interactions, which would makes sense at least to me (who didn't study quantum mechanics, lol).
It's hardly comparable to the fancy one-shot simulations we call AI right now.
I don't think ion channels are small enough for quantum interactions to be significant. Do you have any source for quantum interactions in neurons?
I think you're right, but people love shoehorning quantum effects in anything they can. Decoherence is likely too fast in these systems to be meaningful: they're relatively enormous
It would still be matrices. Just matrices that include quantum effects.