this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2026
1038 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
87302 readers
4353 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don’t trust anyone who is impressed by LLMs enough to consider them to be in any way adjacent to intelligence.
You are absolutely right! Should I create a list of people who you should not trust?
Why would that be necessary? They’ll freely and readily identify themselves.
They were responding as an LLM would, as a joke.
OK, I don’t use them. Thanks for the explanation.
How do you define intelligence? If LLMs are not intelligent NO other animal could ever be considered intelligent and many humans in the lower percentiles too. And that percentile is only going up.
Intelligence can be defined as sentience or sapience. LLMs lack both (they just regurgitate information and have neither understanding nor self-awareness).
I mean, if your argument is just semantics, that’s just… pedantic.
You could draw that line anywhere. The NPCs I play against in a strategy game could be “intelligence.”
You know what people mean. People are talking about ~anthropic cognition, which is clearly not what’s going on in current LLMs. They can do intelligent things, maybe they are an “intelligent” by some definition you define, but they are not even close to animalistic cognition.
You and others here act as if this is some clear cut thing, while actually defining it is extremely hard and everything but clear cut.
I find it scary how many people here are blindly against LMMs directly (not the big companies behind them or whatever) with about as much irrational hate as the people they despise, like Trump. They act the same way. Saying LMMs are not intelligent is so absurd I am not sure how to go forward, such a statement is oozing with bias.
I'm not againt LLMs. They're usefull tools, and I've been tinkering with them since 2021, and generative ML before that. I have one loaded on my desktop pretty much all the time; DeepseekV4 0731 is running, right this second.
I use them all the time. I hack at them as a hobby; I know how useful they can be.
But you're stopping just short of calling them "alive." They're not even close, not even in the same universe. They do tasks with intelligence or some variant of that, but they are not intelligent. And I'm not trying to be pedantic, that is a loaded term that implies cognition and adaptability they do not have.
They're basically the same thing as weather prediction models, but for text output. They're just a model.
And I think its very dangerous when people fall into the trap of thinking they are, fundamentally, more than that. That's the fantasy Altman and such are selling the public, to con them.
Hence, the article above ^. What's coming out of these leaders' mouths does not match what people are getting, and they can tell. And that's because the premise they're being sold, of "artificial intelligence," is a lie.
Thanks for outing yourself. Makes it easy to just skip the conversation and not bother trying to open up a conversation made in bad faith.
Thanks for proving my point, your service is invaluable.
LLMs are explosively imprecise, statistically luke-warm, grey goo extrusion sphincters. They can’t produce anything novel, at best they can reveal potentially plausible information from the data they were trained on, which then requires proven domain expertise to validate.
Intelligence requires comprehension, a trait LLMs are intrinsically incapable of performing.
Define comprehension then.
Understanding, context[0].
Computers are particularly adept at iteration, and LLMs are an application that leverages this effectively. To wit, I’ll concede LLMs are ‘AI’, where that initialisation represents Accelerated Iteration, or in management as Amplified Incompetence, but as an example of Intelligence, that remains for those who are proud of their lack of the naturally occurring variety.
[0]: to frame a larger memory pool as a ‘context window’ is a misnomer, as context requires understanding and comprehension.
For starters, an LLM wouldn't even survive in the body of a small insect. They're incompetent at everything.
Prove me wrong. Make an LLM-powered insect that buys more LLM-powered insects. Have it demonstrate any fitness at all.
Most people don't consider animals to have intelligence (outside of some apes) which is why they're readily used as food.
They're used as food because that's how people have been socialized. Nobody would willingly eat a dog, but they would eat a pig. Pigs are more intelligent than dogs.
If you're old enough you likely learned in school that animals aren't intelligent or capable of consciousness or self-awareness. None of those things are true.