4 ms·

Two points: GPT4 is significantly better in this regard, and you should be concerned about the rate of progress more than it’s actual capabilities today.

Jeff_Brown 4y ago
> you should be concerned about the rate of progress Kind of agree? On the one hand we don't even have a roadmap toward reliable AI. On the other, if we ever plug an LLM into something that has memory, acquires experiences, does experiments, observes the outcome and adjusts its worldview in response, consciousness might fall out of that. And writing good code might not even require consciousness.
- flatline 4y ago
  Epistemologically speaking, I think we can roughly break down the potential nature of consciousness into three categories: - as a function of an independent human soul - as the fundamental substrate on which the rest of the universe is built - as a byproduct/secondary phenomenon of physical processes In the latter two cases I believe that the question of whether GPT is conscious is immaterial. In either case it is functioning in the same medium we all are when we talk, think, write. In the first case it is not, and the question is thornier.
  - Jeff_Brown 4y ago
    Consciousness in this context is often used as an imprecise but important bundle of very material concepts, including whether something can have wants (and therefore warrants our anticipation of them) and whether it deserves ethical status. One can debate whether either those is necessarily a consequence of consciousness, but nonetheless those kinds of qualities are what people are aiming at when they wonder about conscious AI.
    - grantcas 4y ago
      [dead]
blibble 4y ago
I suspect (and sort of hope) they're close to hitting a local maxima presumably they've already fed it all the code in the world (including a load they probably aren't licensed to)
- WinstonSmith84 4y ago
  If you tried GPT4, you probably understood it's not about feeding all the code in the world. GPT4 analyzes and "understands" your code and will answer based on this. Clearly, it will read the variable names and make deductions based on this. It will actually read the comments, the function names and make decisions based on this. And it knows the rules of the language. I mean, I'm writing this because this is what I've witnessed since the time I spent playing with it. The problem I've seen is that, maybe like the author has been writing, it's making sh*t up. That's not untrue, sometimes I didn't give it all dependent classes and it tried to think sometimes correctly, sometimes incorrectly what those were (such as method signatures, instance members, etc.) I wish it would have asked me some details rather than trying to figure things out. The guys at OpenAI have still a lot to do, but the current status is very impressive
  - blibble 4y ago
    it is entirely about feeding it all the code in the world it doesn't understand anything, it doesn't make deductions it's a probability model, and I understand how it's implemented perfectly well, thank you
    - famouswaffles 4y ago
      No you obviously don't lol
    - travisjungroth 4y ago
      Even view it as a simple probability model, you don’t need a million Python repos. The massive amount of English text + 1,000 repos + your codebase is very powerful. You can see this because you can make up a language, give it some examples and it’s surprisingly good.
grantcas 4y ago
[dead]

Jeff_Brown 4y ago

> you should be concerned about the rate of progress Kind of agree? On the one hand we don't even have a roadmap toward reliable AI. On the other, if we ever plug an LLM into something that has memory, acquires experiences, does experiments, observes the outcome and adjusts its worldview in response, consciousness might fall out of that. And writing good code might not even require consciousness.

flatline 4y ago
Epistemologically speaking, I think we can roughly break down the potential nature of consciousness into three categories: - as a function of an independent human soul - as the fundamental substrate on which the rest of the universe is built - as a byproduct/secondary phenomenon of physical processes In the latter two cases I believe that the question of whether GPT is conscious is immaterial. In either case it is functioning in the same medium we all are when we talk, think, write. In the first case it is not, and the question is thornier.
- Jeff_Brown 4y ago
  Consciousness in this context is often used as an imprecise but important bundle of very material concepts, including whether something can have wants (and therefore warrants our anticipation of them) and whether it deserves ethical status. One can debate whether either those is necessarily a consequence of consciousness, but nonetheless those kinds of qualities are what people are aiming at when they wonder about conscious AI.
  - grantcas 4y ago
    [dead]

blibble 4y ago

I suspect (and sort of hope) they're close to hitting a local maxima presumably they've already fed it all the code in the world (including a load they probably aren't licensed to)

WinstonSmith84 4y ago
If you tried GPT4, you probably understood it's not about feeding all the code in the world. GPT4 analyzes and "understands" your code and will answer based on this. Clearly, it will read the variable names and make deductions based on this. It will actually read the comments, the function names and make decisions based on this. And it knows the rules of the language. I mean, I'm writing this because this is what I've witnessed since the time I spent playing with it. The problem I've seen is that, maybe like the author has been writing, it's making sh*t up. That's not untrue, sometimes I didn't give it all dependent classes and it tried to think sometimes correctly, sometimes incorrectly what those were (such as method signatures, instance members, etc.) I wish it would have asked me some details rather than trying to figure things out. The guys at OpenAI have still a lot to do, but the current status is very impressive
- blibble 4y ago
  it is entirely about feeding it all the code in the world it doesn't understand anything, it doesn't make deductions it's a probability model, and I understand how it's implemented perfectly well, thank you
  - famouswaffles 4y ago
    No you obviously don't lol
  - travisjungroth 4y ago
    Even view it as a simple probability model, you don’t need a million Python repos. The massive amount of English text + 1,000 repos + your codebase is very powerful. You can see this because you can make up a language, give it some examples and it’s surprisingly good.

grantcas 4y ago

[dead]