this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2023
135 points (94.1% liked)

Technology

34877 readers
9 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] iopq@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yet it can outperform humans on some tests involving logic. It will never be perfect, but that implies you can test its IQ

[–] huginn@feddit.it 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  1. Not consistently and not across truly logical tests. They abjectly fail at abstract reasoning. They do well only in very specific cases.
  2. IQ is an objectively awful measure of human intelligence. Why would it be useful for artificial intelligence?
  3. For these tests that are so centered around specific facts: of course a model that has had the entirety of the Internet encoded into it has the answers. The shocking thing is that the model is so lossy that it doesn't ace the test.
[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

IQ correlates with a good number of things though. It'a not perfect but it's not meaningless either.

[–] huginn@feddit.it 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And global warming correlates with the decline in piracy rates. IQ is a garbage statistic invented by early 20th century eugenicists to prove that white people were the best.

You can't boil down the nuance of the most complex object in the known universe to a single number.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Not perfectly you can't. But similarly to how people's SAT scores predict their future success, IQ tests in aggregate do have predictive power.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

IQ is objectively a good measure of human intelligence. High IQ people have higher educational achievement, income, etc.

[–] huginn@feddit.it 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Don't take the effect and make it the cause my guy

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I never said it's the cause. We're trying to find a measure that correlates well with actual intelligence g

IQ correlates with g, but also income/education correlates with g because smarter people do better in these metrics.

IQ doesn't make you smarter, but smarter people can do better on IQ tests

[–] huginn@feddit.it 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

smarter people do better in these metrics.

Smarter by what measure? IQ?

You're using circular reasoning here.

Income and education levels are not the same thing as intelligence, nor are smarter people higher earners or more well educated.

IQ correlates best with educational achievement. Educational achievement is best predicted by your zip code. Poverty creates sharp educational disadvantages.

Intelligence, as measured by your maximally attainable levels of obtaining knowledge and skills, is something that the majority of people will never test their limits of.

IQ tests do not measure that maximum, only how far along that trajectory you might have come compared to your "peers".

Therefore: IQ tests are 1 step removed from just asking someone where they grew up, how much college they attended and how much money their parents made.

It has nothing to do with measuring that underlying factor and everything to do with measuring socioeconomic status.

It was a crude tool invented by eugenicists to promote genocide and you should stop using or respecting it at all.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

You have the cause and effect switched. More intelligent parents have higher incomes, their kids also are more likely to have higher intelligence because it's heritable. So if a bunch of rich Jews live in a Manhattan, does it mean that IQ is predicting their zip code? Or is it predicting they are Jewish? That's just a weird way of thinking about it.

Your definition of intelligence is not that is commonly thought of intelligence. It's like saying "intelligence is your maximum chess skill measured by elo and you will never achieve it"

But learning to play chess quickly would also fall under intelligence. Given not being a high level at a similar game, there will be people who learn quicker than others. Learning languages, learning from your experience, all fall under intelligence.

If you take all of these measures, average them, you will get a true intelligence measurement. IQ is a sample of true intelligence by using only some measurements, since intelligence can have an infinite amount of tasks that it can be used to perform

[–] exponential_wizard@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Test it's IQ". The fact that you think IQ is a useful test for intelligence tells me everything I need to know

[–] iopq@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

The fact you went out of your way to write it's when I wrote the correct "its" tells me everything I need to know about your educational achievement