They’re many fancy tensors glued together and passed through activation functions.
I call them “bullshit generators”
Call it “LLM”
I call it Exported Thought. Or Lazy Braining.
I will admit, though, that its image generation gimmick has been entertaining and useful one or two times when I wanted to quickly create a meme in my earlier days of experimenting with it.
“It’s not AI because we can explain how it works” slop.
Everything is either a fancy matrix or something that is locally well approximated by a fancy matrix
We should start using the term abominable Intelligence
Simulacrum of Intelligence
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…?
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.
