> Well said 4o. If you are a system of immense intelligence then everyone should take this rebuttal seriously.
Nope. Something can be written by a human being of immense intelligence but not deserve taking seriously, if (for instance) it was written as a deliberate attempt at deception or a joke.
In this instance, you told the AI to argue for a particular conclusion and it did. If the conclusion should happen to be wrong, then no matter how clever the AI might be its arguments can't actually be all that good.
(I don't think GPT-4o is in fact a system of immense intelligence unless you use a really idiosyncratic notion of "intelligence", for what it's worth. That doesn't tell us much about whether its successor's successor's successor might be one.)
The point I was trying to make was that the Sam Altman's of the world make a whole lot of unfalsifiable claims about the nature and capabilities of his AI, while just hand-waving a bunch of things away.
In my merry state last night I didn't do a great job so I'm not surprised by the lack of positive response, though I was kind of hoping some people would catch my drift. Oh well.
> I am struggle to express myself in response to this, possibly because I'm at the bar, but I reeeaaally want to respond... so hold my beer and please forgive me for this long comment.
I'm going to not only assume that you are of the male gender but also will assume that if you need to rely on a LLM to produce this kind of slop, substituting soda for beer isn't really going to assist with your literacy.
