News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Looming Liability Machines (LLMs). Parent comment

Re:Looming Liability Machines (LLMs) by austin-cheney on Sunday August 25, 2024 @04:49AM (#41345659)
That is an incorrect comparison. A building, all buildings, are dwellings, but they are no more or less the sum of their parts than anything else. It’s not about the construction materials. It’s about the utility.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Looming Liability Machines (LLMs) by teleforce on Sunday August 25, 2024 @05:19AM (#41345819)
Not OP but I think it is correct comparison.

Dijkstra's quote succinctly summarized the arguments:

"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim."

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Looming Liability Machines (LLMs) by CoastalCoder on Sunday August 25, 2024 @10:44AM (#41347655)
With all due respect to Dijkstra, whether or not something is interesting is subjective.

I wonder if his point was that the question didn't need to be answered for whatever they were discussing at the time?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Looming Liability Machines (LLMs) by dTal on Sunday August 25, 2024 @10:58AM (#41347756)
His point is that question ultimately boils down to a semantic argument over the word "think/swim", which may be interesting to a linguist but is not philosophically meaty in the way the question implies.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Looming Liability Machines (LLMs) by low_tech_love on Sunday August 25, 2024 @02:36PM (#41349942)
> It’s not about the construction materials. It’s about the utility.

I think I missed your point. Wasn’t that exactly what I said?

[ Parent | on HN ]