5 ms·
Reminds me of the Star Trek TNG episode where Captain Piccard defends Data's sentience by asking the counterparty to define sentience. Spoiler: it touches on th
by daenz 4y ago
Reminds me of the Star Trek TNG episode where Captain Piccard defends Data's sentience by asking the counterparty to define sentience. Spoiler: it touches on the idea that a human being—held to the same definition of "sentience"—cannot be proven to be sentient either.
I'm not saying that I think LaMDA has any sentience (I have no idea, and it's very unlikely), but if we're getting close enough that we're fooling more and more smart people, it sounds like we should really figure out how to classify these creations. Since we've moved the goalposts away from the Turing Test, what test replaces it?
0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol2WP0hc0NY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol2WP0hc0NY
- morelisp 4y agoNot to really defend the Turing test as an intelligence measure, but LaMDA has not passed it. It only does this when probed by Lemoine's specific questioning style. If you try to eluce "machine behavior" it will trivially give it to you, which isn't true of a human - especially a human trying to convince someone they're human.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago> Reminds me of the Star Trek TNG episode where Captain Piccard defends Data's sentience by asking the counterparty to define sentience. Off topic, but when I watched The Original Series I was interested to learn that the TNG episode, which is fairly well known, is mostly just a retread of a very similar TOS episode, which isn't.