this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
97 points (83.4% liked)
Fuck AI
4728 readers
935 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They aren't intelligent, so they aren't AI.
Not how it works.
The field of AI has been about making computers do things they couldn't before. Even if they're just "predicting the next token", LLMs are a significant leap over Markov Chains (which also predict the next token, but produce output that's more funny than useful).
Again, if you're unaware of the history of MIT CSAIL, then you really shouldn't be opining on what is and isn't AI.
There's a difference between the field developing more advanced technology towards AI and calling every piece of that AI. Yes, this is part of a larger field that has worked on this for decades. The previous stuff wasn't called AI, and this shouldn't be either. It's only the companies selling a product who started that.
Would you consider Conway's Game of Life to be AI? Because the field certainly did back in the day, and it's less impressive than LLMs.
No they fucking didn't. That's absurd. They may have talked philosophically about if it was alive. No one thought it was intelligent. You can look at the code and know that. They called it AI in the same way video games do maybe, not in the way the academic field does.
It was developed by academics in the first place. It's AI because it was developed by AI researchers.
That's how it works. You build knowledge by making these little pieces. LLMs are one of those pieces. It won't get to full human intelligence on its own, but it might be part of what gets there.
Not everything AI researchers develop is suddenly AI. That's my point, and they know that. What you're implying is that as soon as the field developed AI existed, and not before. It being made by AI researchers is not the definition of AI.
Its also not an issue with it not being full human intelligence. It isn't intelligent at all. It doesn't think about what it outputs. It's just a statistical model. It's a very advanced statistical model that creates the appearance of intelligence, but it isn't intelligent.
Then what is AI? Or do you think there's no intermediate steps between Turning Machine and full intelligence?
There are many intermediate steps. That's what the field of AI work has been doing. This is but one of many steps. It is not intelligent though, so it isn't AI. It is just a step. A basic Turing Machine is also just a step, and you wouldn't call it AI, would you?
So dumb it hurts.