3 ms·
The brain is not a product of engineering, but of evolution. As a biomedical engineering graduate, I feel obligated to point out that even though I think consci
by __loam 2y ago
The brain is not a product of engineering, but of evolution. As a biomedical engineering graduate, I feel obligated to point out that even though I think consciousness is a result of physical process that in theory can be replicated, we have so far failed to achieve that. Saying consciousness is "just" an emergent property of dense neural networks is kind of a signal to me that have a pretty ignorant view on this stuff that's more rooted in machine learning terminology than actual biology.
- cameronh90 2y agoPacman was cutting edge in 1980. In the 45 years since, we've managed to go from "waka waka" to something that could trick many people in a short conversation. Yes, it's probably not conscious, and so you're technically correct in that we've failed to achieve consciousness. But you have to factor that current SOTA ANNs running our best supercomputers aren't even close in computational capability to the human brain. Reasonably, the human brain is still several orders of magnitude more powerful at executing a NN than our computers are at simulating one and we're likely still decades away from the average researcher having access to a machine as capable as a human brain. Given that, and that nobody knows positively where consciousness exists within the brain, I'm not sure how you can be so confident as to suggest that GP is being ignorant. Many ideas behind LLMs were invented in the 60s and have just been waiting for powerful enough computers to experiment with them. Another few orders of magnitude and we may see more emergent behaviour that is impossible to distinguish from consciousness.