3 ms·
Good, as imagine what you would need to believe to equivocate between people and shell scripts. I really think this view is more indicative of a peer enabled pe
by motohagiography 4y ago
Good, as imagine what you would need to believe to equivocate between people and shell scripts. I really think this view is more indicative of a peer enabled personality disorder than insight or compassion. I'm very harsh about this because when I wondered what belief his equivocation was enabling, it became clear that the person involved could not tell fiction from truth. The belief in the aliveness of the code reinforces the a-humanity of people and reduces us all to a narrative experience, completely divorced from physical or greater reality.
When you can't tell the difference between people and symbols you've accepted nihilism, and with the begged question as to why. This person wasn't sentimental, he lost the plot. Google has a lot of power and a lot of crackpots, and that puts them all at risk politically and commercially. If as an individual you want to fight for something, consider seriously whether someone who compares a script to men and women should be operating what is effectively your diary.
- jiveturkey 4y ago> When you can't tell the difference between people and symbols you've accepted nihilism well, either that or the AI has become sentient.
- alasdair_ 4y ago> I really think this view is more indicative of a peer enabled personality disorder than insight or compassion. I really think that diagnosing random strangers with mental disorders without ever meeting them is rude and unkind, in addition to likely being completely erroneous.
- elcomet 4y agoOf course their model was not conscious but I disagree that we can never build a conscious machine based on symbol manipulation.
- ehsankia 4y agoI don't understand why everyone here is talking about Lambda not being sentient or Lemoine's state of mind. None of that is relevant here. He was fired for literally taking confidential information and leaking it straight to the press. This is instant firing at any company.
- pnt12 4y agoThere's not much to discuss there: "man shares information company forbid him to". Yawn. But thinking about his concerns, how he tested the AI: that's interesting. Or it could be interesting, as it seems he just asked loaded questions, and the replies from the AI occasionally re-enforced his beliefs. Double yawn,I guess.
- unethical_ban 4y agoIt may be legally cut and dried, but the next question is do we as a society trust Google to act ethically with such substantial developments? Assuming he were correct, and Google was suppressing information, would he be in the moral right to leak it?
- just_boost_it 4y agoIf he really was an engineer working on this, you'd hope he'd be pretty expert, but you'd at least expect him to understand what was going on in the model. His outburst showed that he really did not.
- ehsankia 4y agoHe wasn't working on lambda itself, he switched (specifically) switched to a team whose job it was to evaluate Lambda (not the people who make it).