3 ms·

You're conflating skepticism that LLM's "solve the mystery" with contrarian "AI denialism". The former is very sanely grounded and frankly there's a lot about t

You're conflating skepticism that LLM's "solve the mystery" with contrarian "AI denialism". The former is very sanely grounded and frankly there's a lot about the brain that is still a mystery (yes the algorithms, not the boring biologically specific details). The later is tedious Neo-cartesian dualism that usually has ulterior motives. This paper did not in fact show the brain working anything like a LLM. You can kind of shoe horn a LLM into reproducing a fair bit of what the brain does, but you are taking a hammer to a screw and claiming you've understood how it works you just have to scale up your hammer.

yyyk 4y ago
>yes the algorithms, not the boring biologically specific details Some of the biological details are a mystery too. Just recently a 4th brain membrane was discovered: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34279605 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34279605
- IIAOPSW 4y ago
  There's two camps interested in studying the brain. One is interested primarily in figuring out human physiological function, of which the brain is a most difficult challenge. The other is interested in figuring out consciousness and cognition well enough to make an AI, for which the brain is the only reference implementation and so they have no choice. The former finds new membranes interesting and wants to catalog them all and that is undoubtedly good and useful work. The latter wants to deduce exactly which mechanisms make thought happen and avoid overfitting to the very messy details of this particular implementation and that is also undoubtedly good and useful work. But for the latter group, a 4th membrane is yet more work on their pile. They're trying to distill things down to the fewest possible things needed for it to work, not the most possible things that actually can be found! Very divergent interests despite a deeply shared object of attention and intellectual capacity. What I'm getting at is, membranes are cool, I'm not personally very motivated by them.

yyyk 4y ago

>yes the algorithms, not the boring biologically specific details Some of the biological details are a mystery too. Just recently a 4th brain membrane was discovered: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34279605 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34279605

IIAOPSW 4y ago
There's two camps interested in studying the brain. One is interested primarily in figuring out human physiological function, of which the brain is a most difficult challenge. The other is interested in figuring out consciousness and cognition well enough to make an AI, for which the brain is the only reference implementation and so they have no choice. The former finds new membranes interesting and wants to catalog them all and that is undoubtedly good and useful work. The latter wants to deduce exactly which mechanisms make thought happen and avoid overfitting to the very messy details of this particular implementation and that is also undoubtedly good and useful work. But for the latter group, a 4th membrane is yet more work on their pile. They're trying to distill things down to the fewest possible things needed for it to work, not the most possible things that actually can be found! Very divergent interests despite a deeply shared object of attention and intellectual capacity. What I'm getting at is, membranes are cool, I'm not personally very motivated by them.