• andyburke@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah, but the critical question is: is human intelligence statistics?

      Seems no, to me: a human lawyer wouldn’t, for instance, make up case law that doesn’t exist. AI has done that one already. If it had even the most basic understanding of what the law is and does, it would have known not to do that.

      This shit is just megahal on a gpu.

      • candybrie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Seems no, to me: a human lawyer wouldn’t, for instance, make up case law that doesn’t exist

        You’ve never seen someone misremember something? The reason human lawyers don’t usually get too far with made-up case law is because they have reference material and they know to go back to it. Not because their brains don’t make stuff up.

        • andyburke@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          I think you’re not aware of the AI making up a case name from whole cloth that I am talkimg about? Because that’s not misremembering, it’s exactly what you would expect unintelligent statistical prediction to come up with.

          • candybrie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Have you ever graded free response tests before? I assure you that some people do similar things when pressed to come up with an answer when they don’t know. Often, they know they’re BSing, but they’re still generating random crap that sounds plausible. One of the big differences is that we haven’t told AI to tell us “I’m not sure” when it has high uncertainty; though plenty of people don’t do that either.