It's not intelligent!
It's not intelligent!
"It merely has all of the byproducts of intelligence, its not intelligence though!" I make this statement in a frank way to rhetorically get the point across. I find myself continually surprised by the general community's desire to reject the intelligence claim in its entirely. I make no claim that
I think it would be good when discussing AI to step back and ponder what you mean by words like "intelligent", "conscious", etc. If you assert that the current crop of AI models aren't intelligent with a concrete, objective definition, then you should also admit that you're asserting that because you want it to be true, not because it's been proven so. If you start invoking qualia, then you've already fallen for a philosophical trap.
I think this article is interesting, because it provides some food for thought on that, "Intelligence is best measured by outcomes". Similar argument to "I don't care if it's intelligent or not, what matters is that it's useful"