3 ms·
Sorry I still don't understand the difference. Say that we get next-word-predictors like say GPT-8 that are really good, and we can't tell them apart from a hum
by ftxbro 4y ago
Sorry I still don't understand the difference. Say that we get next-word-predictors like say GPT-8 that are really good, and we can't tell them apart from a human by interacting with them through text. What does that say about philosophical zombies and chinese rooms? Would that bot be a philosophical zombie? Would it be a chinese room? Would it be both? What are those arguments supposed to prove to me about the bot? When I hear those arguments, am I supposed to interpret the bot in some specific way as a result of those philosophical arguments?
- turtleyacht 4y agoI really wish you had gotten follow-up for this. I have some questions, but likely it's already buried in your past threads. If consciousness ends up "pretty darn similar" to ChatGPT-8, and we still can't peer into the opaque box, do we put it in a drone and have it fly around us? A literal companion. But it can't be conscious, right? It's just really really good at predicting the-next-word. It otherwise has no goals of its own. It speaks as others would have spoken. Let's say we can model a virtual twin of a person, such that the scanning bit is near realtime; we present to the observer with an artificial delay, so both person and twin appear to speak at the same time. But the human doesn't need to wait on input. They are self-directed, goal-seeking agents. They supply their own while-loop and terminate when bored. They could knock on the glass and yell at the observer. This "extra layer" may always confound claims of AGI. We would have to prove we lived in a hologram before we could establish the "final context" of computers being conscious. Anyway, interested in hearing your thoughts. Even a brainstorm. Thank-you :)