Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Stanisław Lem

Quote by Stanisław Lem

“One can, to be sure, program a digital machine in such a way as to be able to carry on a conversation with it, as if with an intelligent partner. The machine will employ, as the need arises, the pronoun “I” and all its grammatical inflections. This, however, is a hoax! The machine will still be closer to a billion chattering parrots—howsoever brilliantly trained the parrots be—than to the simplest, most stupid man. It mimics the behavior of a man on the purely linguistic plane and nothing more.”

Quote by Stanisław Lem

Book:A Perfect Vacuum
Create image

Work

A Perfect Vacuum

This book delves into the idea of a perfect vacuum, examining its implications in various contexts, including science, philosophy, and personal relationships. more

Author

Stanisław Lem

Browse famous quotes and profile details for Stanisław Lem. more

You May Also Like

“Imagine an alternate universe in which people don’t have words for different forms of transportation—only the collective noun “vehicle.” They use that word to refer to cars, buses, bikes, spacecraft, and all other ways of getting from place A to place B. Conversations in this world are confusing. There are furious debates about whether or not vehicles are environmentally friendly, even though no one realizes that one side of the debate is talking about bikes and the other side is talking about trucks. There is a breakthrough in rocketry, but the media focuses on how vehicles have gotten faster—so people call their car dealer (oops, vehicle dealer) to ask when faster models will be available. Meanwhile, fraudsters have capitalized on the fact that consumers don’t know what to believe when it comes to vehicle technology, so scams are rampant in the vehicle sector. Now replace the word “vehicle” with “artificial intelligence,” and we have a pretty good description of the world we live in. Artificial intelligence, AI for short, is an umbrella term for a set of loosely related technologies. ChatGPT has little in common with, say, software that banks use to evaluate loan applicants. Both are referred to as AI, but in all the ways that matter—how they work, what they’re used for and by whom, and how they fail—they couldn’t be more different.”

AiArtificial IntelligenceHypeComputingManiaGenerative AiChatgptLarge Language ModelsPredictive Ai
Book:AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can't, and How to Tell the Difference
Create image

“[All] modern chatbots are actually trained simply to predict the next word in a sequence of words. They generate text by repeatedly producing one word at a time. For technical reasons, they generate a “token” at a time, tokens being chunks of words that are shorter than words but longer than individual letters. They string these tokens together to generate text. When a chatbot begins to respond to you, it has no coherent picture of the overall response it’s about to produce. It instead performs an absurdly large number of calculations to determine what the first word in the response should be. After it has output—say, a hundred words—it decides what word would make the most sense given your prompt together with the first hundred words that it has generated so far. This is, of course, a way of producing text that’s utterly unlike human speech. Even when we understand perfectly well how and why a chatbot works, it can remain mind-boggling that it works at all. Again, we cannot stress enough how computationally expensive all this is. To generate a single token—part of a word—ChatGPT has to perform roughly a trillion arithmetic operations. If you asked it to generate a poem that ended up having about a thousand tokens (i.e., a few hundred words), it would have required about a quadrillion calculations—a million billion.”

AiArtificial IntelligenceComputingGenerative AiChatgptLarge Language Models
Book:AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can't, and How to Tell the Difference
Create image

“Unleashing Reliable Insights from Generative AI by Disentangling Language Fluency and Knowledge Acquisition Generative AI carries immense potential but also comes with significant risks. One of these risks of Generative AI lies in its limited ability to identify misinformation and inaccuracies within the contextual framework. This deficiency can lead to mistakenly associating correlation with causation, reliance on incomplete or inaccurate data, and a lack of awareness regarding sensitive dependencies between information sets. With society’s increasing fascination with and dependence on Generative AI, there is a concern that the unintended consequence that it will have an unhealthy influence on shaping societal views on politics, culture, and science. Humans acquire language and communication skills from a diverse range of sources, including raw, unfiltered, and unstructured content. However, when it comes to knowledge acquisition, humans typically rely on transparent, trusted, and structured sources. In contrast, large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT draw from an array of opaque, unattested sources of raw, unfiltered, and unstructured content for language and communication training. LLMs treat this information as the absolute source of truth used in their responses. While this approach has demonstrated effectiveness in generating natural language, it also introduces inconsistencies and deficiencies in response integrity. While Generative AI can provide information it does not inherently yield knowledge. To unlock the true value of generative AI, it is crucial to disaggregate the process of language fluency training from the acquisition of knowledge used in responses. This disaggregation enables LLMs to not only generate coherent and fluent language but also deliver accurate and reliable information. However, in a culture that obsesses over information from self-proclaimed influencers and prioritizes virality over transparency and accuracy, distinguishing reliable information from misinformation and knowledge from ignorance has become increasingly challenging. This presents a significant obstacle for AI algorithms striving to provide accurate and trustworthy responses. Generative AI shows great promise, but addressing the issue of ensuring information integrity is crucial for ensuring accurate and reliable responses. By disaggregating language fluency training from knowledge acquisition, large language models can offer valuable insights. However, overcoming the prevailing challenges of identifying reliable information and distinguishing knowledge from ignorance remains a critical endeavour for advancing AI algorithms. It is essential to acknowledge that resolving this is an immediate challenge that needs open dialogue that includes a broad set of disciplines, not just technologists Technology alone cannot provide a complete solution.”

TechnologyInnovationArtificial IntelligenceGenerative AiLarge Language Models
Author:Tom Golway
Create image

“Once trained, the LLM is ready for inference. Now given some sequence of, say, 100 words, it predicts the most likely 101st word. (Note that the LLM doesn’t know or care about the meaning of those 100 words: To the LLM, they are just a sequence of text.) The predicted word is appended to the input, forming 101 input words, and the LLM then predicts the 102nd word. And so it goes, until the LLM outputs an end-of-text token, stopping the inference. That’s it! An LLM is an example of generative AI. It has learned an extremely complex, ultra-high-dimensional probability distribution over words, and it is capable of sampling from this distribution, conditioned on the input sequence of words. There are other types of generative AI, but the basic idea behind them is the same: They learn the probability distribution over data and then sample from the distribution, either randomly or conditioned on some input, and produce an output that looks like the training data.”

AiArtificial IntelligenceGenerative AiLarge Language Models
Book:Why Machines Learn: The Elegant Math Behind Modern AI
Create image