5 ms·

> How does GPT4 think? It doesn't think. It only processes. And as far as I grasp it, its process can essentially be understood, not least because they were d

> How does GPT4 think? It doesn't think. It only processes. And as far as I grasp it, its process can essentially be understood, not least because they were designed and documented. It is several big mistakes to use "you will not understand" complexity mysticism equally when referring to biological processes and human-designed computer processes. Not the least of which that it is patronising and reductive.

boffinAudio 3y ago
That's right. It is not human. How do humans think? We do not know. AI is merely a facsimile of human thought. We don't know how that works, but we can certainly make a cult of it.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  Oh please. [I note that your subsequent edits invert the sense of what I was originally replying to so I am going to abandon discussion with you]
  - boffinAudio 3y ago
    We don't. Prove me wrong. I'll wait.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
FrustratedMonky 3y ago
"It doesn't think. It only processes." Human thinking is frequently described as 'processing', a 'process'. Guess, that is problem with using Metaphors and analogies. When it comes to Brains and AI, a lot of the same metaphors and analogies have been used over the centuries, so now, which one is 'more accurate'. Can't really say, it depends on what each person meant by that metaphor.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  Yes. Now that we have machines that people are making claims like this for, we really should stop using the word "thinking" so lazily. Human or animal thinking is a process, but it is an innate process of instinct, hypothesis, testing, prediction, overrule, and introspection. (Whether there is metacognition or not). GPT "thinking" is only "thinking" in the colloquial sense of "wait a sec, the computer is thinking about it". GPTs don't think. And they especially don't think in some imaginary complex way that we can't understand.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    Hey aliens just landed and they are telling us we don't think, only they do, we only process.
    - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
      I am not sure what you mean by this. But we, humans, qualitatively think in a way that we absolutely know for sure GPT does not. We are capable of introspection and metacognition. GPT is not. We know it is not, because the software does not provide it the resources or the methods to engage in it. To suggest otherwise is pointless quasi-woo.
      - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
        It wasn't just GPT. You included all animals. I think the point is that you are putting human thought on a pinnacle, that is actually not proven or even commonly accepted. And if you have proof, then you should write a paper and put to rest centuries of questions. The parents example goes like this: Some other 'alien' species could find and examine humans and make the same leap, "these things appear to be forming rudimentary structures like the ants, and forming basic social structures. Hmmmm, my dear Watson, I wonder if they have any metacognition. Do you think they have qualitative thoughts?" -> "But we, humans, qualitatively think in a way that we absolutely know for sure GPT does not." Everyone is using GPT as the goal post. But it is not. Deep Mind just released a paper where AI could do conceptual thought to solve geometry problems. Deep Mind AlphaGo 'imagined' new moves that no human ever would. It is hubris to think that someone wont put AI on a feedback loop, non unlike our own default mode network, and allow continual learning and adapting. And at that point, any distinction between carbon and silicon, for what is happening internally will be on shaky ground. EDIT: Maybe not you. Could have been different thread that used animals. So not you. But part of point, so don't want to edit.

boffinAudio 3y ago

That's right. It is not human. How do humans think? We do not know. AI is merely a facsimile of human thought. We don't know how that works, but we can certainly make a cult of it.

bemusedthrow75 3y ago
Oh please. [I note that your subsequent edits invert the sense of what I was originally replying to so I am going to abandon discussion with you]
- boffinAudio 3y ago
  We don't. Prove me wrong. I'll wait.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

FrustratedMonky 3y ago

"It doesn't think. It only processes." Human thinking is frequently described as 'processing', a 'process'. Guess, that is problem with using Metaphors and analogies. When it comes to Brains and AI, a lot of the same metaphors and analogies have been used over the centuries, so now, which one is 'more accurate'. Can't really say, it depends on what each person meant by that metaphor.

bemusedthrow75 3y ago
Yes. Now that we have machines that people are making claims like this for, we really should stop using the word "thinking" so lazily. Human or animal thinking is a process, but it is an innate process of instinct, hypothesis, testing, prediction, overrule, and introspection. (Whether there is metacognition or not). GPT "thinking" is only "thinking" in the colloquial sense of "wait a sec, the computer is thinking about it". GPTs don't think. And they especially don't think in some imaginary complex way that we can't understand.
- pixl97 3y ago
  Hey aliens just landed and they are telling us we don't think, only they do, we only process.
  - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
    I am not sure what you mean by this. But we, humans, qualitatively think in a way that we absolutely know for sure GPT does not. We are capable of introspection and metacognition. GPT is not. We know it is not, because the software does not provide it the resources or the methods to engage in it. To suggest otherwise is pointless quasi-woo.
    - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
      It wasn't just GPT. You included all animals. I think the point is that you are putting human thought on a pinnacle, that is actually not proven or even commonly accepted. And if you have proof, then you should write a paper and put to rest centuries of questions. The parents example goes like this: Some other 'alien' species could find and examine humans and make the same leap, "these things appear to be forming rudimentary structures like the ants, and forming basic social structures. Hmmmm, my dear Watson, I wonder if they have any metacognition. Do you think they have qualitative thoughts?" -> "But we, humans, qualitatively think in a way that we absolutely know for sure GPT does not." Everyone is using GPT as the goal post. But it is not. Deep Mind just released a paper where AI could do conceptual thought to solve geometry problems. Deep Mind AlphaGo 'imagined' new moves that no human ever would. It is hubris to think that someone wont put AI on a feedback loop, non unlike our own default mode network, and allow continual learning and adapting. And at that point, any distinction between carbon and silicon, for what is happening internally will be on shaky ground. EDIT: Maybe not you. Could have been different thread that used animals. So not you. But part of point, so don't want to edit.