News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it sucks. Parent comment

Re:To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it ... by skeledrew on Saturday May 30, 2026 @01:39PM (#48338783)
Yet it doesn't detract from the fact that 20 years ago this was purely sci-fi; nobody - or a least very few - then envisioned that we'd have the capability we have currently have. And of course we continue to have the same vision now that X won't be possible for a great many years, if ever. And we also continually carefully refine the generally accepted definition of "intelligence" so that it specifically excludes whatever the current capabilities are, so we can indefinitely continue to say "this isn't intelligence".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it ... by newaccountman2 on Saturday May 30, 2026 @02:03PM (#48339021)
> Yet it doesn't detract from the fact that 20 years ago this was purely sci-fi; nobody - or a least very few - then envisioned that we'd have the capability we have currently have.

I agree with that, but I don't think anyone is moving the goalposts as you imply later in your post.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:To have a moral stance on AI is to be an outcast, and it ... by queenkjuul on Saturday May 30, 2026 @05:23PM (#48340748)
I think if you showed me LLM AI twenty years ago, I'd be like "what's the trick, what's the catch, how does it work" and then the statistical nature of it would be explained to me and I'd have the exact same reaction as i had when i learned how it worked in ~2021: oh, that's very clever, and maybe even very useful, but idk if it's "intelligent"

Machine learning wasn't unheard of 20 years ago, and statistical text engines were hitting consumer use (iPhone autocomplete probably what 2008-2010?)

[ Parent | on HN ]