Then you clearly haven’t been paying attention, because just as zealously as you defend it’s nonexistent use cases there are people defending the idea that it operates similar to how a human or animal thinks.
You’re definitely correct that most people are ignorant on these models work. I think most people understand these models aren’t sentient, but even among those who do, they don’t become emotionally attached to these models. I’m just saying that the people who end up developing feelings for chatbots go beyond ignorance. They have issues that require years of therapy.
Then you clearly haven’t been paying attention, because just as zealously as you defend it’s nonexistent use cases there are people defending the idea that it operates similar to how a human or animal thinks.
My point is that those people are a very small minority, and they suffer from issues that go beyond their ignorance of these how these models work.
I think they’re more common than you realize. I think people ignorance of how these models work is the commonly held stance for the general public.
You’re definitely correct that most people are ignorant on these models work. I think most people understand these models aren’t sentient, but even among those who do, they don’t become emotionally attached to these models. I’m just saying that the people who end up developing feelings for chatbots go beyond ignorance. They have issues that require years of therapy.
The difference is that the brain is recursive while these models are linear, but the fundamental structure is similar.
The difference is that a statistical model is not a replacement for an emulation. Their structure is wildly different.
Removed by mod
How many electricity powered machines processing binary data via crystal prisms did we see evolve organically?
Removed by mod
I wasn’t appealing to nature I was explaining that the processes are completely different.
Removed by mod