3 ms·
You're trying to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps here. If sentience is required to produce the kinds of texts that LLMs produce then sentience is a fea
by seanhunter 4y ago
You're trying to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps here.
If sentience is required to produce the kinds of texts that LLMs produce then sentience is a feature of LLMs of course. But if sentience is required for my computer to produce the "Tada!" noise when it switches on then my computer is sentient also. (It's probably not sentient.) Nothing you have said establishes in any sense that LLMs are sentient, and the Chinese Room experiment shows that we can't just rely on our intuition.
- hackinthebochs 4y agoI'm not sure what to make of comments like this. The discussion around LLMs and their capacities has just been universally horrendous. >But if sentience is required for my computer to produce the "Tada!" noise when it switches on then my computer is sentient also. But there is a large and obvious difference between your PCs boots up sound process and the output of LLMs. For one, its far more plausible that sentience is required to produce the kinds of texts that LLMs produce than to produce a boot up sound. >Nothing you have said establishes in any sense that LLMs are sentient I wasn't trying to, I was simply pointing out the error in concluding a lack of sentience from the arguments given. If you want to have a discussion about how/why LLMs might be sentient, I'm happy to have it. But most people don't actually want to have that discussion.