

Just look it up. It made the news rounds about 10 or so years ago. It was a big deal at the time. Just about everyone covered it and Lenovo acknowledged it and, IIRC they apologized for it
Just look it up. It made the news rounds about 10 or so years ago. It was a big deal at the time. Just about everyone covered it and Lenovo acknowledged it and, IIRC they apologized for it
You mean arguing with people who show you’re wrong? Good move.
It’s not a requirement to have all those things. Having just one is enough to meet the definition. Such as problem solving, which LLMs are capable of doing.
That’s the same as arguing “life” is conscious, even though most life isn’t conscious or sapient.
Some day there could be AI that’s conscious, and when it happens we will call that AI conscious. That still doesn’t make all other AI conscious.
It’s such a weirdly binary viewpoint.
Ok. I won’t.
No, it’s because it isn’t conscious. An LLM is a static model (all our AI models are in fact). For something to be conscious or sapient it would require a neural net that can morph and adapt in real-time. Nothing currently can do that. Training and inference are completely separate modes. A real AGI would have to have the training and inference steps occurring at once and continuously.
Education was always garbage though. It is designed to generate obidient wage slaves.
in the US
Fixed that for you
You have that backwards. People are using the colloquial definition of AI.
“Intelligence” is defined by a group of things like pattern recognition, ability to use tools, problem solving, etc. If one of those definitions are met then the thing in question can be said to have intelligence.
A flat worm has intelligence, just very little of it. An object detection model has intelligence (pattern recognition) just not a lot of it. An LLM has more intelligence than a basic object detection model, but still far less than a human.
You might want to look up the definition of intelligence then.
By literal definition, a flat worm has intelligence. It just didn’t have much of it. You’re using the colloquial definition of intelligence, which uses human intelligence as a baseline.
I’ll leave this graphic here to help you visualize what I mean:
That’s why they’re calling it “AI”.
That’s not why. They’re calling it AI because it is AI. AI doesn’t mean sapient or conscious.
Edit: look at this diagram if you’re still unsure:
Torvalds be with you. Go in peace.
Sorry for trying to improve everyone’s lives. How selfish of us to share superior technology.
I guess we’ll just hoard all the good stuff and not let you guys have any of it from now on.
Windows is idiot proof, meaning that it’s kind of hard to ruin desktop windows during the normal operations.
Are you new? Windows will barf all over itself and all your files doing regular updates. Happened to my wife’s computer just recently. She has almost nothing installed on it aside from Steam and Chrome. Windows update turned itself into a hot mess, and it’s a known issue. The only option was to do a completely fresh install of Windows.
Idiot proof my ass.
Almost any default text editor on Linux is better than Windows notepad, and many are straight up better than Notepad++
MM/DD/YYYY
DD/MM/YYYY
Both of these are the wrong way to format dates.
If you want to stop endless troubleshooting, switch to Linux.
But nobody who uses it treats it like “just a tool.”
I do. I use it to tighten up some lazy code that I wrote, or to help me figure out a potential flaw in my logic, or to suggest a “better” way to do something if I’m not happy with what I originally wrote.
It’s always small snippets of code and I don’t always accept the answer. In fact, I’d say less than 50% of the time I get a result I can use as-is, but I will say that most of the time it gives me an idea or puts me on the right track.
A part of my brain always reads AI as Al (yes, those are two different letters). As in Albert.
So it’s generative Albert. And “Albert is increasingly using more power”.
The Galaxy S series and the Pixel devices cost about the same tbh
So? That’s not what the person you replied was even saying. You completely missed the point of their comment.
And? I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.