He is writing about LLM mainly, and that is absolutely AI, it’s just not strong AI or general AI (AGI).
You can’t invent your own meaning for existing established terms.
LLMs are AI in the same way that the lane assist on my car is AI. Tech companies, however, very carefully and deliberately play up LLMs as being AGI or close to it. See for example toe convenient fear-mongering over the “risks” of AI, as though ChatGPT will become Skynet.
LLMs are AI as it is defined in Computer Science, not SciFi. And the lane assist on your car might also be, although it may just be a well tuned PID for all I know.
I have to do similar things when it comes to ‘raytracing’. It meant one thing, and then a company comes along and calls something sorta similar the same thing, then everyone has these ideas of what it should be vs. what it actually is doing. Then later, a better version comes out that nearly matches the original term, but there’s already a negative hype because it launched half baked and misnamed. Now they have to name the original thing something new new to market it because they destroyed the original name with a bad label and half baked product.
is this where we get to explain again why its not really ai?
Nope, just where you divest your stocks like any other tech run.
He is writing about LLM mainly, and that is absolutely AI, it’s just not strong AI or general AI (AGI).
You can’t invent your own meaning for existing established terms.
LLMs are AI in the same way that the lane assist on my car is AI. Tech companies, however, very carefully and deliberately play up LLMs as being AGI or close to it. See for example toe convenient fear-mongering over the “risks” of AI, as though ChatGPT will become Skynet.
LLMs are AI as it is defined in Computer Science, not SciFi. And the lane assist on your car might also be, although it may just be a well tuned PID for all I know.
I agree, but the problem is that the media (encouraged by tech companies) use the sci-fi definition, and the layman doesn’t know any better.
deleted by creator
You should research the definition of AI then. Even the A* pathfinding algorithm was historically considered AI. It’s a remarkably broad field.
Even a mildly complex state machine is AI.
All that really tells us is that the people who defined the term were remarkably stupid.
I have to do similar things when it comes to ‘raytracing’. It meant one thing, and then a company comes along and calls something sorta similar the same thing, then everyone has these ideas of what it should be vs. what it actually is doing. Then later, a better version comes out that nearly matches the original term, but there’s already a negative hype because it launched half baked and misnamed. Now they have to name the original thing something new new to market it because they destroyed the original name with a bad label and half baked product.