12 ms·

We know that complex arrangements of neurons are triggered based on input and generating output that appears to have some intelligence to many humans. The more

We know that complex arrangements of neurons are triggered based on input and generating output that appears to have some intelligence to many humans. The more interesting question is why are intelligence/beauty/consciousness emergent properties that exist in our minds.

dennisy 3y ago
Nature created humans to understand nature. We created GPT4 to understand ourselves.
- NobleLie 3y ago
  A mirror of ourselves*
- keyle 3y ago
  That's beautiful until you think about it. Humans so far have done a great job at destroying nature faster than any other kind could. And GPT4 was created for profit.
- mensetmanusman 3y ago
  Humans are the universe asking who made it.
  - slacka 3y ago
    Yes, or put a bit more elegantly, 'The cosmos is within us. We are made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself.' — Carl Sagan
- greenhearth 3y ago
  Yes, "all serve "gpt4!" Get a grip, pretty please.
otabdeveloper4 3y ago
There is no evidence that intelligence runs on neurons. Yes, there are neurons in brains, but there's also lots of other stuff in there too. And there are creatures that exhibit intelligent properties even though they have hardly any neurons at all. (An individual ant has only something like 250000 neurons, and yet they're the only creatures beside humans that managed to create a civilization.)
- account-5 3y ago
  In what way a civilization?
  - jxf 3y ago
    I'll repost a comment via Reddit that I think makes this case [0]: Ants have developed architecture, with plumbing, ventilation, nurseries for rearing the young, and paved thoroughfares. Ants practice agriculture, including animal husbandry. Ants have social stratification that differs from but is comparable to that of human cultures, with division of labor into worker, soldier, and other specialties that do not have a clear human analogy. Ants enslave other ants. Ants interactively teach other ants, something few other animals do, among them humans. Ants have built "supercolonies" dwarfing any human city, stretching over 5,000 km in one place. And ants too have a complex culture of sorts, including rich languages based on pheromones. Despite the radically different nature of our two civilizations, it is undeniable from an objective standpoint that this level of society has been achieved by ants. [0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/t2h1vs/ants_have_achieved_civilization/ https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/t2h1vs/an...
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      To be honest, this description is leaning heavily on the associations we have with individual words used. Ant "architecture" isn't like our architecture. Ant "plumbing" and "ventilation" have little in common with the kind of plumbing and ventilation we use in buildings. "Nurseries", "rearing the young", that's just stretching the analogy to the point of breaking. "Agriculture", "animal husbandry" - I don't even know how to comment on that. "Social stratification" is literally a chemical feedback loop - ant larvae can be influenced by certain pheromones to develop into different types of ants, which happen to emit pheromones suppressing development of larvae into more ants of that type. Etc. I could go on and on. Point being, analogies are fun and sometimes illuminating, but they're just that. There's a vast difference in complexity between what ants do, and what humans do.
talentedcoin 3y ago
There is no evidence that any of those are emergent properties. It’s no more or less logical than asserting they were placed there by a creator.
- gitfan86 3y ago
  There is evidence that people believe that GTP-4 is intelligent since it can solve things like the SATs. But if you start taking away weights one by one at some point those same people will say it isn't intelligent. A NN with 3 weights cannot solve any problems that humans believe requires intelligence. So where did it come from? I don't know, but it clearly emerged as the NN got bigger.
  - chaxor 3y ago
    It's possible that the comment you're responding to is referring to the new paper out of Stanford/Google on emergence as a 'mirage'. The gist of it is that the shape of the curve for 'metric' vs 'params' is dependent upon the type of metric. For classification it has a certain shape, for accuracy it has another, etc. The authors claim the observation that these curves are determined by the choice of metric means that it isn't true emergence, but rather is due to the way in which GPTs are typically trained to predict the next token (and then beam search or typical sampling is often applied afterwards, etc). The paper is somewhat new so I haven't done a proper review to know if it's solid work yet, but this may offer some context for some of the comments in this thread.

dennisy 3y ago

Nature created humans to understand nature. We created GPT4 to understand ourselves.

NobleLie 3y ago
A mirror of ourselves*
keyle 3y ago
That's beautiful until you think about it. Humans so far have done a great job at destroying nature faster than any other kind could. And GPT4 was created for profit.
mensetmanusman 3y ago
Humans are the universe asking who made it.
- slacka 3y ago
  Yes, or put a bit more elegantly, 'The cosmos is within us. We are made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself.' — Carl Sagan
greenhearth 3y ago
Yes, "all serve "gpt4!" Get a grip, pretty please.

otabdeveloper4 3y ago

There is no evidence that intelligence runs on neurons. Yes, there are neurons in brains, but there's also lots of other stuff in there too. And there are creatures that exhibit intelligent properties even though they have hardly any neurons at all. (An individual ant has only something like 250000 neurons, and yet they're the only creatures beside humans that managed to create a civilization.)

account-5 3y ago
In what way a civilization?
- jxf 3y ago
  I'll repost a comment via Reddit that I think makes this case [0]: Ants have developed architecture, with plumbing, ventilation, nurseries for rearing the young, and paved thoroughfares. Ants practice agriculture, including animal husbandry. Ants have social stratification that differs from but is comparable to that of human cultures, with division of labor into worker, soldier, and other specialties that do not have a clear human analogy. Ants enslave other ants. Ants interactively teach other ants, something few other animals do, among them humans. Ants have built "supercolonies" dwarfing any human city, stretching over 5,000 km in one place. And ants too have a complex culture of sorts, including rich languages based on pheromones. Despite the radically different nature of our two civilizations, it is undeniable from an objective standpoint that this level of society has been achieved by ants. [0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/t2h1vs/ants_have_achieved_civilization/ https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/t2h1vs/an...
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    To be honest, this description is leaning heavily on the associations we have with individual words used. Ant "architecture" isn't like our architecture. Ant "plumbing" and "ventilation" have little in common with the kind of plumbing and ventilation we use in buildings. "Nurseries", "rearing the young", that's just stretching the analogy to the point of breaking. "Agriculture", "animal husbandry" - I don't even know how to comment on that. "Social stratification" is literally a chemical feedback loop - ant larvae can be influenced by certain pheromones to develop into different types of ants, which happen to emit pheromones suppressing development of larvae into more ants of that type. Etc. I could go on and on. Point being, analogies are fun and sometimes illuminating, but they're just that. There's a vast difference in complexity between what ants do, and what humans do.

talentedcoin 3y ago

There is no evidence that any of those are emergent properties. It’s no more or less logical than asserting they were placed there by a creator.

gitfan86 3y ago
There is evidence that people believe that GTP-4 is intelligent since it can solve things like the SATs. But if you start taking away weights one by one at some point those same people will say it isn't intelligent. A NN with 3 weights cannot solve any problems that humans believe requires intelligence. So where did it come from? I don't know, but it clearly emerged as the NN got bigger.
- chaxor 3y ago
  It's possible that the comment you're responding to is referring to the new paper out of Stanford/Google on emergence as a 'mirage'. The gist of it is that the shape of the curve for 'metric' vs 'params' is dependent upon the type of metric. For classification it has a certain shape, for accuracy it has another, etc. The authors claim the observation that these curves are determined by the choice of metric means that it isn't true emergence, but rather is due to the way in which GPTs are typically trained to predict the next token (and then beam search or typical sampling is often applied afterwards, etc). The paper is somewhat new so I haven't done a proper review to know if it's solid work yet, but this may offer some context for some of the comments in this thread.