4 ms·
> If AI's outputs were literally indistinguishable from something that truly understands these concepts, then there's no practical difference if it really "unde
by _xnmw 4y ago
> If AI's outputs were literally indistinguishable from something that truly understands these concepts, then there's no practical difference if it really "understands". This reduces the concept of understanding to some abstract inconsequential property.
Yes, there is a practical difference. It has consequences in terms of legality, blame, and justice, the other does not. If an AI really "understands" things, then it is responsible for its actions and must be taken to court for crimes, and can be sued for mistakes in the output that result in losses (like any lawyer or professional).
- pornel 4y agoThat is a huge leap into personhood and very human concepts that depend on having volition, motives, feelings, and self-awareness or consciousness. I don't think these are necessary connected to understanding. IMHO it's possible to have full understanding of all of the concepts in the world while only seeing the world as a data snapshot, without being an entity capable of participating in it, without having any feelings, self-awareness, or even any sensory inputs or memory of own experiences. Laws, courts, and their punishments are for humans, and they're likely to be absurdly bad at dealing with a personified AI. AI won't feel fear or remorse, may not have self-preservation as a goal, so it may not care about any threats at all. It may not even have sensory input needed to be aware of being punished.