• Soyweiser@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Yes, and that was a stupid argument unrelated to the point made that evolution used this raw data to do things, thus raw data in LLMs will lead to AGI. You just wanted debate points for ‘see somewhere there is data in the process of things being alive’. Which is dumb gotcha logic which drags all of us down and makes it harder to have normal conversations about things. My reply was an attempt to make you see this and hope you would do better.

    I didn’t call you stupid, I called the argument stupid, but if the shoe fits.

    • froztbyte@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      No no see, since everything is information this argument totally holds up. That one would need to categorize and order it for it to be data is such a silly notion, utterly ridiculous and unnecessary! Just throw some information in the pool and stir, it’ll evolve soon enough!

      • mountainriver@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        The number of rocks in my garden is information. Yet, despite counting them all, I have not found AGI. So I must need more information than that.

        Clearly, counting all the rocks in Wales should do it. So much counting.

    • voracitude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I didn’t want “debate points”, I wanted to know what you would call sensory inputs if not “raw data”. Completely independent of anything else, which I tried to make clear in my post, the clarity which you completely ignored to accuse me of making a stupid argument. I made very specific effort to distance myself from the argument being made by the other poster, because I wanted to ask the one question and the one question alone, so to be lumped in with it anyway is more than galling.

      Example: you lot just want to lash out at internet strangers for asking an honest question because it’s in the wrong context as far as you’re concerned. Is that a fair characterisation of your intent? No? Same. So you can take your accusations of intellectual dishonesty and this block, and fuck off.