TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why OpenAI, Anthropic and DeepSeek Won't Reach AGI

2 点作者 frag3 个月前

2 条评论

reg_dunlop3 个月前
Interesting read. Time wasn&#x27;t a variable I had considered missing from interactions with AI, but it makes sense.<p>I&#x27;d also add this: tools like the AI bots so prevalent today are flawed because they cannot consider things like context, limitations, dependencies and scope. I give a question...they attempt to spit out a complete answer with complete disregard for the context which my question is coming from.<p>AI fails in the same way a monkey can&#x27;t drive a car.... abstraction. We humans know a red light ahead means stop at the stop light, not stop immediately where you are right now. All AI can do is make a best guess of what the inputs pattern-match to. This is like always having an answer without ever asking for clarification or context.
评论 #43087055 未加载
check0073 个月前
I enjoyed reading your perspective and largely agree with your points. However, I believe it would be more compelling if you could provide concrete evidence, such as transcripts or results from actual LLM interactions. Many of the examples you’ve cited, such as those involving figures like kings or presidents, feel somewhat dated and well-discussed. Drawing a strong conclusion that LLMs cannot reach AGI or understand concepts like time, solely based on these examples, seems premature without showcasing specific results from modern LLMs. I feel a demonstration of their limitations would strengthen your argument.