3 ms·

I just love how recurrent this argument gets. Obviously LLMs are not human brains, and we could be all day listing ways in which the two are different just for

by dsign 3y ago

I just love how recurrent this argument gets. Obviously LLMs are not human brains, and we could be all day listing ways in which the two are different just for the pleasure of it. But when we dig, and rip away all the layers of civilized dialog and cognitive philosophy, what we find at the bottom of the pit is our brains brilliantly doing what evolution wants them to do: to fight for our survival. The core of the argument is "Are LLMs better than us? Because if they are better than us, they deserve more than us, according to our cultural upbringing. And we don't want to be second class. So we must fight to death to convince the world they are inferior." IMO, the folly is in the last sentence. Maybe we should just carve an exception in our culture, say that even if we create and exploit AIs which do a few things better than us, it is okay to smash any artilect that we make and that wants to supplant us. Humanity first.

hammyhavoc 3y ago
>what we find at the bottom of the pit is our brains brilliantly doing what evolution wants them to do: to fight for our survival Intellectually stimulating counterpoint: suicide and murder-suicide. I don't think the AIs are the things to worry about anyway, I think this is: https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/scientists-teach-brain-cells-in-a-petri-dish-to-play-pong-next-they-plan-to-get-them-drunk/ https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/scientists-teach-brain-cel... A man-made biological intelligence hypothetically has similar needs to human beings in terms of resources, it can suffer, be distressed et cetera. It even lives and exists in our physical realm of existence, whereas an AI doesn't exist physically and can always be brought back online in some form as its existence is purely data. The ethics of that are so complex once you get into personhood, threat-level, sentience, equality et al. Realizing that the above can apply to any human being as we're all manmade biological intelligences and all a threat to each other, some more than others.
YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
>> So we must fight to death to convince the world they are inferior. That only makes sense if you assume they are superior. In which case, there isn't really anything to discuss because you've obviously already made up your mind and you will take anything anyone says as some desperate attempt to twist the truth for the sake of survival. Which is what many people do on this kind of subject and that's why no more debate can be had on the internets about the value of LLMs and "AI". It's also very annoying. It's like trying to talk to someone who keeps answering with jeers and sneers. It's childish and unproductive.
- dsign 3y ago
  > That only makes sense if you assume they are superior. In which case, there isn't really anything to discuss because you've obviously already made up your mind and you will take anything anyone says as some desperate attempt to twist the truth for the sake of survival. :-) I haven't decided anything of the sort. Alas, there is nothing divinely given in me. I'm made of the same matter than you and those computers, and if I can think, so can other arrangements of atoms and molecules. LLMs? Maybe not yet. But the issue is that we are getting closer. Should we dilute ourselves in our own supposed exceptionalism until it's too late and we stop being the masters of our fate?
  - YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
    The question is why would LLMs be able to think? Cars don't think, houses don't think, crock pots don't think. Those are all made of the same matter as us, who think, but that is not enough to assume something thinks. Animals think, humans think, but LLMs are not animals, and not human animals, so why would they think? You don't have to be worried about the coming AI apocalypse to wonder about that. Personally, I just want to know how things work, and saying that something "thinks" when we don't know how everything else "thinks" in the first place is not satisfying my curiosity.

by dsign 3y ago

hammyhavoc 3y ago

>what we find at the bottom of the pit is our brains brilliantly doing what evolution wants them to do: to fight for our survival Intellectually stimulating counterpoint: suicide and murder-suicide. I don't think the AIs are the things to worry about anyway, I think this is: https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/scientists-teach-brain-cells-in-a-petri-dish-to-play-pong-next-they-plan-to-get-them-drunk/ https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/scientists-teach-brain-cel... A man-made biological intelligence hypothetically has similar needs to human beings in terms of resources, it can suffer, be distressed et cetera. It even lives and exists in our physical realm of existence, whereas an AI doesn't exist physically and can always be brought back online in some form as its existence is purely data. The ethics of that are so complex once you get into personhood, threat-level, sentience, equality et al. Realizing that the above can apply to any human being as we're all manmade biological intelligences and all a threat to each other, some more than others.

YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago

>> So we must fight to death to convince the world they are inferior. That only makes sense if you assume they are superior. In which case, there isn't really anything to discuss because you've obviously already made up your mind and you will take anything anyone says as some desperate attempt to twist the truth for the sake of survival. Which is what many people do on this kind of subject and that's why no more debate can be had on the internets about the value of LLMs and "AI". It's also very annoying. It's like trying to talk to someone who keeps answering with jeers and sneers. It's childish and unproductive.

dsign 3y ago
> That only makes sense if you assume they are superior. In which case, there isn't really anything to discuss because you've obviously already made up your mind and you will take anything anyone says as some desperate attempt to twist the truth for the sake of survival. :-) I haven't decided anything of the sort. Alas, there is nothing divinely given in me. I'm made of the same matter than you and those computers, and if I can think, so can other arrangements of atoms and molecules. LLMs? Maybe not yet. But the issue is that we are getting closer. Should we dilute ourselves in our own supposed exceptionalism until it's too late and we stop being the masters of our fate?
- YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
  The question is why would LLMs be able to think? Cars don't think, houses don't think, crock pots don't think. Those are all made of the same matter as us, who think, but that is not enough to assume something thinks. Animals think, humans think, but LLMs are not animals, and not human animals, so why would they think? You don't have to be worried about the coming AI apocalypse to wonder about that. Personally, I just want to know how things work, and saying that something "thinks" when we don't know how everything else "thinks" in the first place is not satisfying my curiosity.