• Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Not everything you see in a paper is automatically science, and not every person involved is a scientist.

    That picture is a diagram, not science. It was made by a writer, specifically a columnist for Medium.com, not a scientist. It was cited by a professor who, by looking at his bio, was probably not a scientist. You would know this if you followed the citation trail of the article you posted.

    You’re citing an image from a pop culture blog and are calling it science, which suggests you don’t actually know what you’re posting, you just found some diagram that you thought looked good despite some pretty glaring flaws and are repeatedly posting it as if it’s gospel.

    • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      You’re citing an image from a pop culture blog and are calling it science

      I was being deliberately facetious. You can find similar diagrams from various studies. Granted that many of them are looking at modern AI models to ask the question about intelligence, reasoning, etc. but it highlights that it’s still an open question. There’s no definitive ground truth about what exactly is “intelligence”, but most experts on the subject would largely agree with the gist of the diagram with maybe a few notes and adjustments of their own.

      To be clear, I’ve worked in the field of AI for almost a decade and have a fairly in-depth perspective on the subject. Ultimately the word “intelligence” is completely accurate.