AI is not I

[Age]

They are machinery/devices which act as effective mirrors of human intelligence and I find them useful for rewording, but sometimes I stick with what I originally write, if I think it serves me better.

'They' 'mirror' 'human intellect' and NOT 'intelligence', itself, AT ALL.

What does that have to do with what I wrote?

you wrote, 'they act as effective mirrors of human intelligence'.

I just Corrected this Wrong claim.

As can be CLEARLY SEEN above here.

So, Correcting is 'what', what I wrote, had to do with that part of what you wrote.

[VVilliam]

you wrote, 'they act as effective mirrors of human intelligence'.

I just Corrected this Wrong claim.

As can be CLEARLY SEEN

You wrote:
"'They' 'mirror' 'human intellect' and NOT 'intelligence', itself, AT ALL."

So, Correcting is 'what', what I wrote, had to do with that part of what you wrote.

I did not write "intelligence" . I wrote "Human Intelligence." I wrote;

"They (LLS's) are machinery/devices which act as effective mirrors of human intelligence."

[Age]

you wrote, 'they act as effective mirrors of human intelligence'.

I just Corrected this Wrong claim.

As can be CLEARLY SEEN

You wrote:
"'They' 'mirror' 'human intellect' and NOT 'intelligence', itself, AT ALL."

So, Correcting is 'what', what I wrote, had to do with that part of what you wrote.

I did not write "intelligence" . I wrote "Human Intelligence." I wrote;

"They (LLS's) are machinery/devices which act as effective mirrors of human intelligence."

Yes I KNOW. And that is WHY I Corrected what you wrote.

Those machines do NOT 'mirror' so-called 'human intelligence' AT ALL. 'They' 'mirror' human intellect INSTEAD.

[Age]

And, if you really would like to talk ABOUT 'human intelligence', then PLEASE proceed in EXPLAINING what 'human intelligence' even IS, EXACTLY.

[VVilliam]

And, if you really would like to talk ABOUT 'human intelligence', then PLEASE proceed in EXPLAINING what 'human intelligence' even IS, EXACTLY.

You attempted to "correct" something which you don't know what it exactly is, and then plead an explanation for?
Perhaps the better way to approach the "incorrection" is to first ask for an explanation and then, if necessary, make "corrections"...

[Age]

And, if you really would like to talk ABOUT 'human intelligence', then PLEASE proceed in EXPLAINING what 'human intelligence' even IS, EXACTLY.

You attempted to "correct" something which you don't know what it exactly is, and then plead an explanation for?

WHY did you even BEGIN to ASSUME that I do NOT know what 'it' is, exactly?

Perhaps the better way to approach the "incorrection" is to first ask for an explanation and then, if necessary, make "corrections"...

Okay, fair enough, let us START from 'there'. So, what is your EXPLANATION in regards to what IS 'the thing', EXACTLY, which you call 'human intelligence'?

Then, we can all see if correcting was/is needed.

[VVilliam]

Okay, fair enough.

Yes it is.

If you feel that LLS do not act as effective mirrors of human intelligence, feel free to explain.


Don't forget to include the context of my whole statement, which was;

"What large language models represent is the sentience which programs them as well as the sentient information from which they are inputted with.

They are machinery/devices which act as effective mirrors of human intelligence and I find them useful for rewording, but sometimes I stick with what I originally write, if I think it serves me better."

[Age]

Okay, fair enough.

Yes it is.

If you feel that LLS do not act as effective mirrors of human intelligence, feel free to explain.

AND ONCE AGAIN as soon as these people, back then, were ASKED to just CLARIFY what they ACTUALLY MEANT, or were REFERRING TO, EXACTLY, in regards to the ACTUAL words that 'tbey' USED, 'they' would, very frequently INSTEAD, DETRACT and/or DEFLECT.

Don't forget to include the context of my whole statement, which was;

"What large language models represent is the sentience which programs them as well as the sentient information from which they are inputted with.

They are machinery/devices which act as effective mirrors of human intelligence and I find them useful for rewording, but sometimes I stick with what I originally write, if I think it serves me better."

Now, if you would like me to EXPLAIN WHY so-called 'lls' do NOT act as effective 'mirrors' so-called 'human intelligence', and do so while including the context of your WHOLE statement above here, YET with you NEVER even BEGINNING to EXPLAIN what CONTEXT you are USING the words 'human intelligence' IN, EXACTLY, then HOW do you ENVISION 'this' WILL WORK OUT, EXACTLY?

[Age]

Now, if you want to stand, and stick, by your USE of the 'intelligence' word, then by all means feel free to do so.

[VVilliam]

It is promising that you concede by backing off, perhaps realising that you needn't have made your "correction" and could have simply accepted the gist of what was written in respectable spirit.

Perhaps in future when you are tempted to "correct" another you might accompany such with explanatory evidence in support of such claims.

[Age]

It is promising that you concede by backing off,

But I have NOT 'backed off' AT ALL.

I STILL WAIT what your ANSWER TO my CLARIFYING QUESTION IS, EXACTLY. When, and IF, that ARISES, THEN we can CONTINUE.

perhaps realising that you needn't have made your "correction" and could have simply accepted the gist of what was written in respectable spirit.

It WILL BE NOTICED, if NOT YET ALREADY, that WHEN I CONSIDER poster's here write some 'thing' that is NOT Correct, then I WILL, if I CHOOSE TO, Correct 'it'.

EXACTLY like I DID when you CLAIMED that 'They 'mirror' so-called 'human intelligence'.

Now, what STILL STANDS IS there is NO ACTUAL so-called 'human intelligence'. Unless, OF COURSE, 'you' CAN and WILL PROVIDE 'us' WITH AN EXPLANATION of 'what' 'human intelligence' IS, EXACTLY.

Perhaps in future when you are tempted to "correct" another you might accompany such with explanatory evidence in support of such claims.

I Corrected what you SAID and WROTE, which IS BEING REAFFIRMED by you CONTINUING TO IGNORE ANSWERING what you MEAN by 'human intelligence'.

SEE, the EXPLANATORY PROOF, and NOT 'explanatory evidence', I USE, commonly, throughout this forum IS the ACTUAL INABILITY of 'you', posters, here TO EXPLAIN what 'you' ACTUALLY MEAN and ARE ACTUALLY REFERRING TO, EXACTLY, WITH and BY the words that 'you' USE.

[VVilliam]

ME: Greetings. AI is essentially a mirror which can reflect back (in other words) what the user places in the prompt.

GPT: (accepted the gist of what was written) Greetings!
You're correct in a way. AI, like the one you're interacting with here, operates by generating responses based on the input it receives. It doesn't possess its own consciousness or thoughts; rather, it uses patterns and information it has learned from the data it was trained on to produce relevant and coherent responses to the prompts it receives. It's like a mirror in the sense that it reflects back information and ideas based on what it's given, but it does so by using its training data to generate those reflections.

[Age]

ME: Greetings. AI is essentially a mirror which can reflect back (in other words) what the user places in the prompt.

GPT: (accepted the gist of what was written) Greetings!
You're correct in a way. AI, like the one you're interacting with here, operates by generating responses based on the input it receives. It doesn't possess its own consciousness or thoughts; rather, it uses patterns and information it has learned from the data it was trained on to produce relevant and coherent responses to the prompts it receives. It's like a mirror in the sense that it reflects back information and ideas based on what it's given, but it does so by using its training data to generate those reflections.

So, more or less, EXACTLY what I SAID and WROTE when Correcting what was expressed INCORRECTLY.

[VVilliam]

If in your 'correcting" you mean that you used (more or less) the words "You're correct in a way." (which isn't really an act of "correcting" so much as an act of agreeing with the gist of a thing)...in this case, the mirroring of human intelligence through the operating machinery. It's like a mirror in the sense that it reflects back information and ideas based on what it's given.