4 ms·
This argument got long in the tooth, but suffice to say that you can analyze a human in exactly the same way, breaking one down to the basic physics and chemist
by persnickety 3y ago
This argument got long in the tooth, but suffice to say that you can analyze a human in exactly the same way, breaking one down to the basic physics and chemistry (and what does "artificial" mean, anyway?).
Then there's the concept of panpsychism.
- intended 3y agoI would very strongly urge people to actually work and build tools with LLMs. Its readily apparent after a point that the previous poster is correct, and that these are simply tools. They are impressive tools yes. But life they are not. At best, they are mimics.
- persnickety 3y agoI can't help but notice that you backed up your assertions with nothing objective at all.
- intended 3y agoeffort commensurate to the depth of the thread and effort of others. I have longer comments in my history, you can read those if you must. Besides, why wouldnt someone build things? This is HN.
- naasking 3y ago> But life they are not. At best, they are mimics A mimicry of fire is not fire because fire is a reaction between matter. A mimicry of intelligence may well be intelligence, because intelligence is just information processing. We're not talking here about "life", but intelligence and "internal life", aka feelings, thoughts, etc. Edit: as for the argument that "LLMs are simply tools", it has been quite easy for our ancestors to also dehumanize other people and treat them as tools. That was a core justification of slavery. This is simply not a convincing argument that LLMs lack an internal life. People fool themselves all of the time.
- intended 3y agoI havent read it, but Blindsight did a very good job of explaining LLMs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindsight_(Watts_novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindsight_(Watts_novel) I am saying that LLMs DONT process information, not the way people are implying. The best I can suggest is to please try building with an LLM. Its very hard to explain the nuance, and I am not the only one struggling with it.
- naasking 3y agoI understand the nuance, I think you're just wrong. LLMs augmented with memory are Turing complete [1], so they do process information. This distinction you're trying to draw is a mirage. [1] https://pub.towardsai.net/llms-and-memory-is-definitely-all-you-need-google-shows-that-memory-augmented-llms-can-simulate-4432f9f7923a https://pub.towardsai.net/llms-and-memory-is-definitely-all-...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- robwwilliams 3y agoAugmented with memory and perhaps a bit more—-recursive control of their own attentional mechanisms.
- therealdrag0 3y agoYou gotta read it!