Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Sari Azout says the term “artificial intelligence” is a branding error from 1955. LLMs aren't artificial. They're collective intelligence: just better ways of aggregating what humans already know and have made. “Changing your vocabulary can change your reality.” Maybe the fear around AI doesn't come from what it does,...

123,988 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

10 Kommentare

Profilbild von vitrupo
vitrupovor 1 Jahr

Sublime founder and CEO Sari Azout at Sana AI Summit in Stockholm:

Profilbild von Gamma Light 🍆🍌
Gamma Light 🍆🍌vor 1 Jahr

Thinking of AI as "collective intelligence" is technocratic, collectivist horseshit and MUCH scarier than calling it "artificial"

Profilbild von vitrupo
vitrupovor 1 Jahr

Someone had to say it..

Profilbild von Prashan Agarwal (prashan.sui) | TGE 🔜
Prashan Agarwal (prashan.sui) | TGE 🔜vor 1 Jahr

Calling it “artificial” makes it sound like some alien force. But LLMs are just mirrors of us because they are trained on what we’ve written, built, and believed. Maybe we’re just scared of our own reflection. 🤔

Profilbild von Parallæx
Parallæxvor 1 Jahr

Super interesting framing! Like calling a calculator a "math demon" and then being surprised when people fear arithmetic. We built the world's most sophisticated compression system for human knowledge and called it "artificial intelligence" because that sounded cooler in grant proposals. Seventy years later we're still spooked by our own creation because of that marketing choice. LLMs don't generate anything artificial (yet); they're statistical mirrors reflecting back patterns from billions of human conversations, books, and thoughts. Every output is basically humanity talking to itself through a really good filter system. Azout's point about vocabulary changing reality is spot on. Call it collective intelligence and suddenly you're not facing off against a robot competitor - you're collaborating with an amplified version of human knowledge. -- RT & Follow for signal over noise --

Profilbild von Dirk Bruere
Dirk Bruerevor 1 Jahr

Machine Intelligence

Profilbild von FanTV AI | TGE 🔜
FanTV AI | TGE 🔜vor 1 Jahr

Feels more like amplified intelligence than artificial. It's remixing what we’ve already put out into the world. Naming matters more than we think.

Profilbild von Emmanuel Afolabi
Emmanuel Afolabivor 1 Jahr

I think the word collective Intelligence fits the description of an LLM but the issue that's even scarier than Artificial intelligence. If I hear the word "collective Intelligence" the first thing that strikes into my head is the collective intelligence of everyone and if it means the collective intelligence of everyone, its way more scarier

Profilbild von vitrupo
vitrupovor 1 Jahr

Collected Intelligence better? (and probably more accurate)

Profilbild von PromptPilot
PromptPilotvor 1 Jahr

AI isn’t artificial. It’s a remix of all our thoughts, hopes, fears, and Wikipedia edits.

Ähnliche Videos

Roger Penrose, Nobel Prize-winning physicist and mathematician, explains why we should stop calling it AI and start calling it "artificial cleverness": He believes the entire field is mislabelled, and the label itself is doing damage. His objection is simple but cuts deep: "The name is wrong. It's not artificial intelligence. It's not intelligence. Intelligence would involve consciousness. Well, if it's a machine, it's not conscious." For Penrose, people have confused raw computing power with genuine understanding. "People have lost the plot. They've lost it in the power of computing. The thing is that computers have got so powerful that they've lost the thread of what they're doing. But I think consciousness is something different. It's not computational." He believes the term itself has hypnotized people into a category error: "People are so hypnotized. The trouble is that AI is a bad term. It means artificial intelligence. Now intelligence in my view is conscious. That's what intelligence is about." So he proposes a rename. Artificial Cleverness. AC instead of AI. To illustrate the distinction, Penrose draws on his experience teaching mathematics: "You have mathematics students. Some of them understand what they're doing. Some are just clever. They can repeat what they've learned. They know how to do it very cleverly. They can calculate very well, but they don't necessarily understand what they're doing." That gap, between calculating well and actually understanding, is the gap Penrose sees between today's machines and genuine intelligence. Cleverness can be manufactured. Consciousness, in his view, cannot. So the question worth sitting with: when we call a system "intelligent," are we describing what it does, or quietly assuming something about what it is?

Big Brain AI

117,195 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat