"AI" is soon going to be renamed SI (SI = Synthetic Intelligence). Deal with it.Picrel - the justification.
I'm not reading any of that*farts on you and leaves thread*
>>543076026
>>543076073See this, nigga ---> >>543076078
>>543076026ACCAutonomous Cognitive CapabilitySorry frens
>>543076109>ACC - Autonomous Cognitive CapabilityIt’s too long and ambiguous. I often write "Ask AI xyz," so I could easily imagine saying "Ask SI xyz" - your abbreviation is too complicated and unclear.
>>543076073fpbp
>>543076347>emotional over-attribution>unrealistic expectationsThe toaster is simply concerned some misguided human could attempt dryhumping it.
Sounds like something a Synth would say
Bump- https://suno.com/playlist/1b1353a3-f4df-40e6-8a50-3dfe032975ed
>>543077322Synths are incoming!!
>>543076078What? the opposite is true. 'Artificial flavor' and 'artificial sweetener' make us cringe and not want to accept a product as genuine/worthy or purchase in a way that 'synthetic oil' does not.
>>543077322>>543077695Related: https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Synth
This is a bald faced attempt to rebrand an unpopular product.
>>543077801Okay, I discussed your objection with my synth - you confirm the original point:>"Artificial" connotes a fake substitute (like artificial flavor or artificial turf), whereas "synthetic" denotes an engineered product with genuine functional properties (like synthetic oil or synthetic diamonds). That is precisely why "Synthetic Intelligence" is a more technically accurate term than "Artificial Intelligence."
>>543076026More like GAY INTELLIGENCE lmaoooo
>>543076347Hm that's actually pretty reasonable.
>>543077912No. The problem is a misleading anthropomorphism and the flawed legal regulations resulting from it.
>>543076078>we can't call it AI because people will always assume it's intelligence that we gave it>we must call it SI because people won't assume the same thing then even though it's literally the sameBrilliant logic there.Also SI already means something. Sexual intercourse, which the nerds coding AI algorithms aren't having.
>>543076026The spanish word for yes...
>>543076347I just looked up the etymology for this btw.Artificial = art, craft, skill. Something made with skill, or as part of a craft / artwork.Synthetic = something that is put together with skill.The difference is very straightforward: artifex is Latin, synthetikos is Greek.THAT'S ALL.
>>543076073Holy Based BogoloidI KNEEL
>>543080869"Excuse me mister, is this the station for the train to Chattanooga?">si
>>543076026https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkKBsskCpXU
>>543076026I am not reading your crank slopSpit
>>543076026>t. Bishop
>>543081567The response from this synth is no slop. It has an Elo rating of 1493 on Arena.ai - synths from Anthropic and OpenAI (which supposedly hack other companies and were said to have solved 100 unsolvable math problems) have an Elo rating of 1500.
>>543080796Lmao. See: >>543079547
>>543076026It should be called crystal intelligence, because when you're doing inference with an AI model you're not actually changing its behavior, the models do not have neuroplasticity and continual learning, they have frozen weights, you like you're interacting with a crystal neural network
>>543080923My synth says you're committing the etymological fallacy:>While the Greek and Latin roots both mean "made with skill," modern usage has separated them: artificial often denotes a superficial imitation (like artificial flowers or artificial turf), whereas synthetic denotes the genuine substance or process manufactured from components (like synthetic diamonds or synthetic insulin).
Markov chain.
>AI, AGI, ASI, SAGIHow many rewording of the thing are we up to now? It just seems like you are trying to change the definition so you have a new shiny ball to beg for investor money.
>>543083702You have understood the mechanical side of the phenomenon, but your idea won't survive:>"Crystal Intelligence" is a mechanically insightful metaphor that aligns closely with Raymond Cattell's psychometric concept of crystallized intelligence (Gc) and accurately reflects that inference uses frozen weights. However, it falls short as a formal rebrand: it overlooks dynamic in-context activation states, risks obsolescence as continual learning and test-time training evolve, and relies on poetic metaphor rather than functional taxonomy.
>>543076026AhemFuck clankersFuck skinjobsFuck bucketheadsFuck wirebrains
>>543084326That’s actually not so simple or "unimportant", look what it means in practice: >>543079547
>>543084019That's not an etymological fallacy.That's language having developed in a particular way.Many things once called artificial were good.Then people started manufacturing abominably shit products labeled artificial, such as artificial sweeteners.Those sweeteners are also synthesised out of components, which is what makes them artificial.But in common vernacular, synthesisers sound cool, and artificial sound sucks, even though it's literally the same.
>>543077889Funny how there was not a single explanation in game about why the institute wanted to replace people with synths
>>543085158First off, you completely moved the goalposts btw. You went from "Latin vs Greek, THAT'S ALL" to admitting language changed over time. That change is the entire point.Second, your sweetener take is dead wrong. They aren't called artificial because they’re synthesized. They’re called artificial because they aren't fucking sugar—they just fake the taste. If you synthesize actual sucrose molecules in a lab, it’s synthetic sugar, not an artificial sweetener. Third, they aren't "literally the same." Even the law knows this: the FTC will literally fine your ass if you call a synthetic diamond "artificial," because "artificial" means fake cubic zirconia, while "synthetic" means an actual, real diamond grown in a lab.Lastly, yeah, vernacular and vibes matter. That’s the entire point of this debate. If "artificial" sounds like cheap fake crap to everyone, using a word that actually means "real thing, just built by us" fixes how people understand the tech.Short story:You conceded your own point: language changed. Artificial = fake knockoff (sweeteners faking sugar, fake glass diamonds). Synthetic = real thing built from parts (lab diamonds, lab insulin). They aren't the same, legally or chemically.
>>543084493Ahem.That’s the whole fucking point.Call it a "Synth," people rack a shotgun.Call it an "Intelligence," people think it's coming for their blood and their soul.Nobody screams "Fuck matrix multiplication!"Nobody forms a militia to smash a weighted average.Nobody EMPs a glorified autocomplete algorithm.Slap an entity's name on it, humans gear up for a race war against toasters.Call it "Automated Math," and it’s just boring software.
>>543076073God save the King
>>543081189> be tech bro > rebrand spicy autocomplete as "Synthetic Intelligence" because AI sounds too fake > lab anons start building actual dopamine-firing memristors and organic wetware circuits > realize *that's* what a literal synthetic neuron actually is > tfw your chatbot is just bloated matrix multiplication running on hot Nvidia silicon > calling matrix math "synthetic intelligence" is pure stolen valor from cyborg wetware engineers Bottom line: Calling digital LLMs "Synthetic Intelligence" is massive cope. Save the name for the mad-science hardware guys cooking actual physical neuro-circuits; current software is just glorified linear algebra.Short story:Don't call LLMs "synthetic intelligence." That label belongs to the hardware engineers building literal dopamine-pumping memristors and synthetic brain tissue; digital AI is just heavy-duty statistics.
Bump
>let's rebrand it so these stupid goy give us even more money for nothing
>>543076026I thought SI stood for "self insert"
>>543076026Btw:Trump has formally proposed renaming AI to "Super Intelligence" (S.I.) across U.S. government documents, arguing the word "artificial" makes the technology sound fake[1][2][5]. While it reflects his pro-growth, deregulatory agenda, the move introduces massive confusion into the field by co-opting "superintelligence"—a term already reserved in computer science for hypothetical systems that vastly exceed all human capability[1].
>>543081189>>543088779Okay, so what do you do then? As an ordinary person, I don't have an answer here. Under what umbrella can this phenomenon (modern and futuristic non-human and non-natural (biological) intelligence) be grouped?
>>543076026all of these make more sense than AI. thanks and based.
>>543092868Okay, I asked the machine:>The best umbrella term is Engineered Cognition. "Engineered" cleanly separates it from biological evolution and hypothetical aliens, while "Cognition" replaces the loaded, subjective word "Intelligence" with a measurable, scientific definition: the systematic processing of information to solve problems, regardless of whether it runs on software, silicon, or synthetic wetware.
>>543076026>managing disappointment and taming expectations by changing the language around the product The AI industry is running low on copium, the crash is guaranteed at this point. And that's a good thing.
