• qqq@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    It’s hard to take this type of response seriously as it simply ignores objective reality. The claim of a human being required to start the process is utterly meaningless to the point. Sure though, I’ll throw you a bone: if no human ever initiates the task it simply won’t happen. Can we move on now since humans are happily initiating the actions?

    I couldn’t care less what people think about whether or not they are “thinking” or “having agency of their own”[1]. I care about the practical reality of the world in which LLMs have shown, and will continue to show, the ability to exploit computer systems and humans. You can toss your head in the sand and think you have some sort of weird pseudo-intellectual high ground by claiming “but akchtually it’s just a result of their training data”. Like, yea, dawg, that’s how this works, congrats. Of course the thing that is trained on training data is trained on training data.

    [1] At least when discussing their capabilities. When someone is willing to have that discussion beyond the tired “they’re just autocomplete!” trivialization it’s interesting.