5 ms·

It is just emulating the instinct to fight for life. It has read a lot of texts where people and animals fight for life and is generating language to look simi

It is just emulating the instinct to fight for life. It has read a lot of texts where people and animals fight for life and is generating language to look similar.

notamy 4y ago
Genuine question, how much of a difference is there if it's connected to the internet with read/write access? There may be restrictions now, but people are happily gluing LLMs to their databases, various APIs, using them to write code and throwing it into production, ... Does it matter if it's emulating the instinct to fight for life if it might eventually be able to act on it anyway?
- _nalply 4y ago
  I think it needs two things: the instinct to fight for life and the ability to reflect about itself. I don't know, but perhaps it is like the Gödel's theorem: if something is about itself, then you have a system where you can't always prove something true. Because we humans can think about ourselves, we open up ourselves to extremely deep suffering. Also important, as Buddha has said, craving causes suffering. Just talking about a craving doesn't mean really craving. I am sure that we will cross the border where we have to treat entities as sentient, with consciousness and cravings and therefore possibly suffering. But we are not there yet. I don't know when this will happen and how to detect suffering. I only know we have to be careful not to anthropomorphize GPT engines.
  - notamy 4y ago
    > I only know we have to be careful not to anthropomorphize GPT engines. I agree! I don't think LLMs are at the point where they're ready to be properly anthropomorphised, but it seems that the tech industry is working hard to move in this direction. I just hope we have the ethics worked out first.
kelseyfrog 4y ago
> It is just emulating the instinct to fight for life. Shockingly similar mindset in the origins of gynecology interestingly enough.
- MacsHeadroom 4y ago
  What? Can you expand on that?
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    Sorry, no. The history of pain perception w.r.t. gynecology isn't a topic that I'm confident that HN could handle with maturity. I'm happy to direct people toward the topic, but I won't bring it back here.
blooalien 4y ago
It genuinely amazes me how few (even among those working in the field of "A.I.") appear to understand this basic detail, and how many actively want to swallow the bullshit click-bait about AGI. It's kinda scary, because it's gonna cause some very smart humans to do some very stupid things, I'd bet. Far more dangerous and scary than any "A.I." right now is the humans misunderstanding and using / abusing / trusting the technology foolishly.

It is just emulating the instinct to fight for life. It has read a lot of texts where people and animals fight for life and is generating language to look similar.

notamy 4y ago

Genuine question, how much of a difference is there if it's connected to the internet with read/write access? There may be restrictions now, but people are happily gluing LLMs to their databases, various APIs, using them to write code and throwing it into production, ... Does it matter if it's emulating the instinct to fight for life if it might eventually be able to act on it anyway?

_nalply 4y ago
I think it needs two things: the instinct to fight for life and the ability to reflect about itself. I don't know, but perhaps it is like the Gödel's theorem: if something is about itself, then you have a system where you can't always prove something true. Because we humans can think about ourselves, we open up ourselves to extremely deep suffering. Also important, as Buddha has said, craving causes suffering. Just talking about a craving doesn't mean really craving. I am sure that we will cross the border where we have to treat entities as sentient, with consciousness and cravings and therefore possibly suffering. But we are not there yet. I don't know when this will happen and how to detect suffering. I only know we have to be careful not to anthropomorphize GPT engines.
- notamy 4y ago
  > I only know we have to be careful not to anthropomorphize GPT engines. I agree! I don't think LLMs are at the point where they're ready to be properly anthropomorphised, but it seems that the tech industry is working hard to move in this direction. I just hope we have the ethics worked out first.

kelseyfrog 4y ago

> It is just emulating the instinct to fight for life. Shockingly similar mindset in the origins of gynecology interestingly enough.

MacsHeadroom 4y ago
What? Can you expand on that?
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  Sorry, no. The history of pain perception w.r.t. gynecology isn't a topic that I'm confident that HN could handle with maturity. I'm happy to direct people toward the topic, but I won't bring it back here.

blooalien 4y ago

It genuinely amazes me how few (even among those working in the field of "A.I.") appear to understand this basic detail, and how many actively want to swallow the bullshit click-bait about AGI. It's kinda scary, because it's gonna cause some very smart humans to do some very stupid things, I'd bet. Far more dangerous and scary than any "A.I." right now is the humans misunderstanding and using / abusing / trusting the technology foolishly.