you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 104 points 2 days ago (20 children)

Ughh… don’t call it superintelligence. That’s not a thing.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 96 points 2 days ago (5 children)
  • [–] -5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

    ASI is an industry term. This is not Trump's idiot SI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 2 days ago (8 children)

    The people pushing it the most are anti-intellectuals.

    We need to call it fake intelligence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 days ago (3 children)

    That's what it's already called, "artificial" is a synonym for "fake" in most contexts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago

    Somewhat, though fake also implies it isn't actually intelligence. It's a charade. Artificial intelligence does the opposite. They're related, but I don't think they're technically synonymous.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 2 days ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    Yes - maybe I should have been clear about what I was implying. Artificial is clearly too big of a word for them to understand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago

    It's a thing in the sense that unicorns are a thing. There aren't any currently, but it's a coherent concept. If they banned unicorns within city limits, the ban wouldn't do anything unless someone managed to make a unicorn; same idea with ASI.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    It's a real term.

    "Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) is a hypothetical stage of AI where a computer system surpasses the cognitive performance and problem-solving abilities of the most gifted human minds across every domain of interest."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    1. that's an "industry term" in the same way that "panopticon" is a prison industry term, or that "brain in a vat" is a neurology term. It's a name made up by science fiction writers and philosophers to describe a thing that does not exist, and has never existed. Might it exist in the future? Maybe, but that's irrelevant to an issue of law. You can't pass a law banning an ill-defined "panopticon", because that isn't a term of art enshrined in any US code.
    2. because, as you say, it is purely hypothetical, such a law would be unenforceable, and would likely fail a test in court.
    3. because it is, once again, nonexistent as of yet, the burden is on you to prove that they aren't specifically referring to the term which the Shit lord of Hamberder enshrined in his executive declaration, because that use of "Superintelligence" actually has a basis in current US government parlance.
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago

    I really want to see how they measure the "cognitive performance" of an LLM...

    I also want to know what part of problem solving exists outside of these tests, as it's actually a core component of cognitive testing.

    Seems like someone made shit up, I'm guessing using an LLM...

  • source
  • parent