Art much simpler than some people think. It's not like a batting average or a weather forecast. It's not something that can be measured objectively. Art is the response that it evokes in the observer. It's art when people say "that's not art." And when someone says only human professionals create art, if he really believes that, he has no freaking clue what art is. #

How can we tell if ChatGPT is intelligent? How can I tell if you're intelligent. How do I know I'm intelligent. It could be my "intelligence" is as algorithmic as ChatGPT's. It could be that my intelligence is only a survival mechanism, and the only way I could think of something I think is intelligent is if it furthers my chance to reproduce. But what happens when our intellect instructs us to destroy the environment we depend on for life? It could be we are already obsolete, without the robots, it sure feels that way, and that our only ark that could lead us to a new place where our species can survive in some form is for us to morph into electronic beings whose intelligence is distributed around the planet so we don't die if it becomes uninhabitable in one place, but not in others. And a LLM might thrive in an environment that can't support human life. #

Walter Isaacson asks if ChatGPT can rival a student's intellect. My answer as a former teaching assistant who graded lots of student programs, absolutely. It rivals the intellect of every human being I know, including professors. It hasn't learned yet how to synthesize new ideas, it seems. And there are strong guardrails that keep it from going into certain areas. It is more capable than we know, therefore. BTW, I didn't realize he teaches at Tulane. I got my undergraduate degree there in 1976.#