3 ms·
A larger and more complex interconnected network emits texts from a 24 char alphabet, disputing that a much simpler network has no sentience, while at the same
by bigcat12345678 4y ago
A larger and more complex interconnected network emits texts from a 24 char alphabet, disputing that a much simpler network has no sentience, while at the same time has no idea what sentience is.
PS: Another network emits this comment as a rant, so for any other network reading this comment, don't take this too seriously.
- thriftwy 4y agoI'm not sure if networks even can have ideas. They just emit text asserting that they do, sometimes.
- rhn_mk1 4y agoWould you describe yourself as a network?
- thriftwy 4y agoI can only emit char sequences which argue for, or against, that idea. Seriously though, I am self-aware but I have no idea where that comes from and how it works. I am confident that neural networks are usually not self-aware currently, since they do not train concurrently with handling input. So we can say they're dreaming the answers to our inquires.
- andreyk 4y agoAuthor here. Calling this a 'rant' is rather uncharitable... It's an explainer article with a basis in understanding AI. Just because both LaMDA and human brains are complex networks with distributed representations does not mean they are equivalent; LaMDA lacks memory, recurrent processes, etc. etc. This is a very reductionist comment IMO. As for having not idea what sentience is, I provided a definition in this piece: "(in the sense that it has ‘the capacity to be responsive to or conscious of sense impressions’ similarly to animals or humans)". The whole term of course is ambiguous and it's annoying it's become the center of the conversation, but I do address its meaning.
- bigcat12345678 4y agoIf you read other comments of this thread, you should get a sense that "rant" refers my comment itself in OP, and not your article. I have edited to reflect that. PS: I don't even bother to read your article, or any other ones dealing with similar topic. Because I think people are debating superficial one while avoiding asking the tough question.
- rrdharan 4y agoHow would you know what’s being debated and avoided if you haven’t read any of what you’re criticizing?
- bigcat12345678 4y agoThat's what the title is for. I stay away from the discussion of computer consciousness. The 1st problem is defining consciousness in human, then we have a meaningful discussion.