3 ms·

> I'll admit that I haven't even figured out what it means for anything to "know" something. Same! That's the overhanging concern I have when hearing compariso

by 1lint 4y ago

> I'll admit that I haven't even figured out what it means for anything to "know" something. Same! That's the overhanging concern I have when hearing comparisons made between artificial and human intelligence. I don't feel that human knowledge/intelligence is well defined enough to the point where we can meaningfully compare it to alternative systems. But my gut instinct is that our neural architecture is composed of mechanistic biological compounds that gradually evolved sufficiently complex levels of organization to achieve our current level of cognition. Capacity for knowledge/intelligence/consciousness did not suddenly appear at some instant in our evolutionary history, rather it gradually emerged from increasing levels of neural complexity. I would rationalize the development of AI capacity for cognition in a similar light, that it will gradually emerge from increasing levels of complexity.

candiodari 4y ago
But ChatGPT doesn't have any knowledge. It has never interacted with anything other than a training corpus of conversations and all it's ever trying to do is keep you talking. It's also very much NOT interacting with you when it's talking to you (it's not learning/training, it's merely inferring). It's just so good at, frankly, at being a troll (keeping you talking while not caring about truth or being deceitful), that it has learned a bunch of truths, with emphasis on truths that keep people hooked on it's conversations.
- 1lint 4y ago
  I feel that on some level, human knowledge/interaction can be similarly reduced to a basic mechanistic nature. Our prior experiences play the part of training data, and our responses can be reduced to mechanistic processing of stimuli. I believe integrating reinforcement learning would address the last point. I have to say though, humans are much better at trolling.

by 1lint 4y ago

candiodari 4y ago

But ChatGPT doesn't have any knowledge. It has never interacted with anything other than a training corpus of conversations and all it's ever trying to do is keep you talking. It's also very much NOT interacting with you when it's talking to you (it's not learning/training, it's merely inferring). It's just so good at, frankly, at being a troll (keeping you talking while not caring about truth or being deceitful), that it has learned a bunch of truths, with emphasis on truths that keep people hooked on it's conversations.

1lint 4y ago
I feel that on some level, human knowledge/interaction can be similarly reduced to a basic mechanistic nature. Our prior experiences play the part of training data, and our responses can be reduced to mechanistic processing of stimuli. I believe integrating reinforcement learning would address the last point. I have to say though, humans are much better at trolling.