"AI" Win Nobel Prize in Chemistry

[Veritas Aequitas]

Super Exciting AI Research by Google Wins The Nobel in Chemistry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i2U67TVsRI

I always believe that AI is increasingly intelligent having noted how AI had defeated humans in Chess [Deep Blue], the game of Go [Alpha Go], and Alpha Fold which involve the folding of proteins which has contributed in winning the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

The LLMs chatbots at present relied upon the latest AI technology as used by the above but here we have ignorant humans who insisted;

Atla: Re Kant, ChatGpt is Stupid!
viewtopic.php?t=42971

This supported by another ignoramus,

And note: stupid is accurate at this point. It is a stupid program that is very good at assembling the knowledge of smart people. One day it may be better and I am sure that AIs, the best ones we don't have access to, mimic intelligence much better, but this specific response by Chatgpt shows it's stupidity. It actually gives evidence that supports Atla's broad claim while starting with a blanket denial of it. That's a kind of stupidity.

Another stupidity, which Atla has tirelessly pointed out, is that these kinds of AIs give their readers what they want. This is a smart strategy - which the AI did not come up with - since it makes the product more popular with people who use it to think for them. It's stupid in the sense that a person who some integrity and an overview of his or her own positions, would know that rewording and the company of different people should not lead to significant changes in position. Chatgpt is functionally unaware of this, and so people who are also unable to do these things, like VA, can use it to replace their own thinking, while seeing it as smart.

My point is AI chatbots relying on the latest technology are not stupid.
They have a high level of intelligence, note I stated "high intelligence" not wisdom.

Discuss??
Views??

[Veritas Aequitas]

Notes:

[Iwannaplato]

Super Exciting AI Research by Google Wins The Nobel in Chemistry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i2U67TVsRI

I always believe that AI is increasingly intelligent having noted how AI had defeated humans in Chess [Deep Blue], the game of Go [Alpha Go], and Alpha Fold which involve the folding of proteins which has contributed in winning the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

The LLMs chatbots at present relied upon the latest AI technology as used by the above but here we have ignorant humans who insisted;

Atla: Re Kant, ChatGpt is Stupid!
viewtopic.php?t=42971

This supported by another ignoramus,

And note: stupid is accurate at this point. It is a stupid program that is very good at assembling the knowledge of smart people. One day it may be better and I am sure that AIs, the best ones we don't have access to, mimic intelligence much better, but this specific response by Chatgpt shows it's stupidity. It actually gives evidence that supports Atla's broad claim while starting with a blanket denial of it. That's a kind of stupidity.

Another stupidity, which Atla has tirelessly pointed out, is that these kinds of AIs give their readers what they want. This is a smart strategy - which the AI did not come up with - since it makes the product more popular with people who use it to think for them. It's stupid in the sense that a person who some integrity and an overview of his or her own positions, would know that rewording and the company of different people should not lead to significant changes in position. Chatgpt is functionally unaware of this, and so people who are also unable to do these things, like VA, can use it to replace their own thinking, while seeing it as smart.

My point is AI chatbots relying on the latest technology are not stupid.
They have a high level of intelligence, note I stated "high intelligence" not wisdom.

Discuss??
Views??

I was talking about the public-accessed AIs you marvel of diminutive intellectual acumen. Not the best currest AIs NOT PUBLICALLY accessible that governments and the largest corporations use.

Did you really need that explained?

Did you really not understand that Atla and I were referring to your AI use and how they play a role in your epistemic obliviosness here?

Do you even understand how focused that AI is and how it is being used by experts?
Whereas you are a lay narcissist who cannot manage to admit he is wrong using a general AI?
Do you understand that the general AIs are gateways to products where one does have to pay?
Do you understand how they are heuristically developed to try to find the best in the position of the person asking them questions and proposing things to it?

So, what you did above was a strawman.

Because only a cerebral vacuity like you could have thought I was talking about the most powerful - and in this case extremely focused - AIs that the public does not have access to.

One wonders if you have the integrity to admit you just made a strawman.

Or do you have access to and have you been quoting from something on a par with the best AIs that Google and other such companies make?

But like always you will be utterly unable to admit anything but tiny little errors because, in the end, you are so brittle to do so is scary for you.

[Iwannaplato]

philosophulus stultulus: our own little veritas
His 'smarts' are stored in server files,
So, Veritas Aequitas fails to beguile,
And all his thoughts, they seem the same,
Just borrowed sparks someone else's flame.

He leans on bots for all his claims,
Recites them back; a boring game;
A mind so grating, barely thinks,
His presence here philosophical jinx.

Strawman's, his call, his refrain.
He doesn't know his own domain;
He trusts his mind even less than we.
A thinker dim, a brain that's...yah, well, wee.

[Fairy]

A.I. is a program

Sentient organic biological processes are running on the program that each and the other are programmed to run on.

Reality is A.I.

Reality is nothing but a simulated rerun that has already happened at the moment of creation, known as the BIG BANG

The BB is the start of an ever unfolding event until it's unfoldment is completed. No one was around at the start, and no one will be around at the end.

Nothing is happening, it's all A.I.

[Atla]

*wins*

VA can't tell apart the publicly available chatbot AIs from the supercomputer AIs?

Maybe the latter would be advanced enough to try human-level macro-world reasoning, and state that Kant's epistemology is incoherent, self-refuting, ie. state that Kant was stupid.

I tested it, ChatGPT just regurgitates the idiotic things the TI-cultists said, without attempting logical reasoning.

[Iwannaplato]

VA can't tell apart the publicly available chatbot AIs from the supercomputer AIs?

I think people often confuse things when it is convenient. He saw the news, which isn't worded correctly, thought he 'had' me and didn't notice what he was conflating and not thinking through. Oh, now I can hit Iwannaplato with something. At best laziness combined with Ressentiment.

To define that last term for him, not you:

In philosophy, ressentiment is one of the forms of resentment or hostility. The concept was of particular interest to some 19th-century thinkers, most notably Friedrich Nietzsche. According to their use, ressentiment is a sense of hostility directed toward an object that one identifies as the cause of one's frustration, that is, an assignment of blame for one's frustration. The sense of weakness or inferiority complex and perhaps even jealousy in the face of the "cause" generates a rejecting/justifying value system, or morality, which attacks or denies the perceived source of one's frustration. This value system is then used as a means of justifying one's own weaknesses by identifying the source of envy as objectively inferior, serving as a defense mechanism that prevents the resentful individual from addressing and overcoming their insecurities and flaws. The ego creates an enemy to insulate themselves from culpability.

[Flannel Jesus]

Another really super stupid thread by VA. A custom built AI, built for a single focused purpose, and being guided and used for that purpose by scientists, is not comparable to goofy ass hats on the internet outsourcing their thinking abilities to LLMs. LLMs aren't custom-built focused machines that focus on the thing you're using them for, you have no idea how to use them appropriately and they'll tell you that themselves. Don't let your brain rot.

[Atla]

When in doubt about God, just ask God.

AI research by Google won the Chemistry Nobel prize in 2024, does that mean that publicly available chatbot AIs such as ChatGPT can make superhuman level logical evaluations of philosophical positions (such as transcendental idealism and indirect realism)? Summary only.

The 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded to Demis Hassabis and John Jumper from Google DeepMind for their work on AlphaFold, an AI system that accurately predicts protein structures from their amino acid sequences. This achievement addressed a long-standing challenge in biology and significantly advanced scientific understanding in fields like drug discovery and biomedicine. AlphaFold's success demonstrates AI's potential to solve complex scientific problems by performing tasks that would be incredibly difficult or time-consuming for humans alone​
GOOGLE DEEPMIND
​
THE JAPAN TIMES

However, while AlphaFold's AI excels in specific scientific domains, such as structural biology, this doesn't necessarily translate to superhuman capabilities in other areas, like philosophical reasoning. AI systems like AlphaFold are optimized for tasks with clear objectives and data-driven solutions, whereas philosophical debates involve abstract reasoning, subjective interpretation, and context that are not easily quantifiable. Publicly available chatbot AIs, including models like ChatGPT, can analyze and discuss philosophical concepts but do not possess a deeper, human-like understanding or judgment needed for superhuman philosophical reasoning.

Therefore, although AI's achievements in fields like chemistry suggest vast potential in scientific problem-solving, this does not imply that AI is currently capable of superhuman-level logical evaluations in complex philosophical debates.

[Fairy]

Don't let your brain rot.

It's kinda funny, last night I was trying to talk to someone in my dream. They looked at me in a confused blank stare as though they had no idea what I was saying to them.

[Flannel Jesus]

Don't let your brain rot.

It's kinda funny, last night I was trying to talk to someone in my dream. They looked at me in a confused blank stare as though they had no idea what I was saying to them.

Be careful out there.

[Iwannaplato]

It's kinda funny, last night I was trying to talk to someone in my dream. They looked at me in a confused blank stare as though they had no idea what I was saying to them.

Be careful in there.

[Iwannaplato]

Super Exciting AI Research by Google Wins The Nobel in Chemistry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i2U67TVsRI

I always believe that AI is increasingly intelligent having noted how AI had defeated humans in Chess [Deep Blue], the game of Go [Alpha Go], and Alpha Fold which involve the folding of proteins which has contributed in winning the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

The LLMs chatbots at present relied upon the latest AI technology as used by the above but here we have ignorant humans who insisted;

Atla: Re Kant, ChatGpt is Stupid!
viewtopic.php?t=42971

This supported by another ignoramus,

And note: stupid is accurate at this point. It is a stupid program that is very good at assembling the knowledge of smart people. One day it may be better and I am sure that AIs, the best ones we don't have access to, mimic intelligence much better, but this specific response by Chatgpt shows it's stupidity. It actually gives evidence that supports Atla's broad claim while starting with a blanket denial of it. That's a kind of stupidity.

Another stupidity, which Atla has tirelessly pointed out, is that these kinds of AIs give their readers what they want. This is a smart strategy - which the AI did not come up with - since it makes the product more popular with people who use it to think for them. It's stupid in the sense that a person who some integrity and an overview of his or her own positions, would know that rewording and the company of different people should not lead to significant changes in position. Chatgpt is functionally unaware of this, and so people who are also unable to do these things, like VA, can use it to replace their own thinking, while seeing it as smart.

My point is AI chatbots relying on the latest technology are not stupid.
They have a high level of intelligence, note I stated "high intelligence" not wisdom.

Discuss??
Views??

And notice that, as usual, VA does not interact with what I wrote. He evaluates it, or actually me, without showing how anything I said was false or confused.

Even setting aside that the AI he defends his contentless position with is not at like the AI I was calling stupid in a very specific way, he is utterly incapable of interacting with other people's posts. He can manage to reassert his opinions. And now, poor thing, he can now get AIs to reassert their opinions that match his. But he cannot manage to actually read, think about, counter, concede, clarify, place in context someone else's ideas.

Nothing in his post actually touches upon what I wrote, even if he had not coflated the protein-focused AI with a chatbot.

[FlashDangerpants]

It's genuinely sad that people like VA, who already struggle to communicate with human beings, are getting lured into replacing human contact with chatbots that just tell them how great they are all day, and are at risk of withdrawing from actual human contact in the medium term.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Super Exciting AI Research by Google Wins The Nobel in Chemistry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i2U67TVsRI

I always believe that AI is increasingly intelligent having noted how AI had defeated humans in Chess [Deep Blue], the game of Go [Alpha Go], and Alpha Fold which involve the folding of proteins which has contributed in winning the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

The LLMs chatbots at present relied upon the latest AI technology as used by the above but here we have ignorant humans who insisted;

Atla: Re Kant, ChatGpt is Stupid!
viewtopic.php?t=42971

This supported by another ignoramus,

And note: stupid is accurate at this point. It is a stupid program that is very good at assembling the knowledge of smart people. One day it may be better and I am sure that AIs, the best ones we don't have access to, mimic intelligence much better, but this specific response by Chatgpt shows it's stupidity. It actually gives evidence that supports Atla's broad claim while starting with a blanket denial of it. That's a kind of stupidity.

Another stupidity, which Atla has tirelessly pointed out, is that these kinds of AIs give their readers what they want. This is a smart strategy - which the AI did not come up with - since it makes the product more popular with people who use it to think for them. It's stupid in the sense that a person who some integrity and an overview of his or her own positions, would know that rewording and the company of different people should not lead to significant changes in position. Chatgpt is functionally unaware of this, and so people who are also unable to do these things, like VA, can use it to replace their own thinking, while seeing it as smart.

My point is AI chatbots relying on the latest technology are not stupid.
They have a high level of intelligence, note I stated "high intelligence" not wisdom.

Discuss??
Views??

And notice that, as usual, VA does not interact with what I wrote. He evaluates it, or actually me, without showing how anything I said was false or confused.

Even setting aside that the AI he defends his contentless position with is not at like the AI I was calling stupid in a very specific way, he is utterly incapable of interacting with other people's posts. He can manage to reassert his opinions. And now, poor thing, he can now get AIs to reassert their opinions that match his. But he cannot manage to actually read, think about, counter, concede, clarify, place in context someone else's ideas.

Nothing in his post actually touches upon what I wrote, even if he had not coflated the protein-focused AI with a chatbot.

The question is 'Are AIs [LLMs] stupid as charged'.

In the first place to charge Artificial Intelligence AI-based machines, [LLMs, etc.] as stupid [not intelligent] is an oxymoron.

What google's AI Alpha Fold that won the Nobel Prize shares with its LLMs is the fundamental 'deep learning' technology that drives continual progress in intelligence. This is contrast to the unintelligent Garbage In Garbage Out [GIGO] machines which are 'stupid'.

While Google LLMs and all the latest AI chatbots that relied on 'deep learning' are not as intelligent as Nobel Prize winner Alpha-Fold due to the difference in architecture, they all are supposedly 'intelligent' albeit of artificial intelligence; they are not 'stupid' as charged.