> So your claim is that the same type of binary computers that were running Windows 95, and now more powerful computers that can run Far Cry 6 with a better vid

> So your claim is that the same type of binary computers that were running Windows 95, and now more powerful computers that can run Far Cry 6 with a better video card, are basically identical to human brains The type of computer is irrelevant as long as it's a universal computer. What matters is the algorithm in that case. > We know how LLMs work, we do not fully understand how human brains work Correct, which is why claims about LLMs not being like brains or not sentient or not intelligent are just as much fabrication as the claims that they are. > An LLM will NOT go sentient if you cross some imaginary critical point of data. First, you technically don't know that. Second, it seems more plausible that if sentience can be a product or byproduct of an algorithm of a certain type, then any implementation of said algorithm at different scales will all have some sentience, and possibly the extent of sentience will scale with the size of the data set on which it's operating. > Then what? We give my Intel PC a passport? Sentience is not agency. > Even those working in the field will tell you that GIA needs a completely different foundation. Some will, and others will point out that scaling has not showed any sign of slowing down.