No need for personal attacks. Since you won’t define it I will:
The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills (from Oxford Languages)
I would argue this applies to ChatGPT. ChatGPT exists under the hood as a neutral network, and is clearly capable of acquiring knowledge during training. And ChatGPT is also clearly capable of applying that knowledge in producing answers to questions or novel solutions to problems.
Based on this definition, I would argue that ChatGPT is intelligent. Whether ChatGPT is sentient or not is a very different question. I would argue not, but again, that depends on the definition of sentience.
I feel like I had to go at least that hard since they continued their bullshit even after the first insulting one liner. Clearly they’re too dense to screw off otherwise.
Definitely not you.
No need for personal attacks. Since you won’t define it I will:
I would argue this applies to ChatGPT. ChatGPT exists under the hood as a neutral network, and is clearly capable of acquiring knowledge during training. And ChatGPT is also clearly capable of applying that knowledge in producing answers to questions or novel solutions to problems.
Based on this definition, I would argue that ChatGPT is intelligent. Whether ChatGPT is sentient or not is a very different question. I would argue not, but again, that depends on the definition of sentience.
Hey bud I’ve got a hint for you to take, behold the list of people who wanted to have this conversation with your stupid socially inept ass:
…
Add me to that list then, dick.
I feel like I had to go at least that hard since they continued their bullshit even after the first insulting one liner. Clearly they’re too dense to screw off otherwise.