It’s not even told, it continues a text (or denoises an image) in a way that closely resembles what was in the training data. Experience, senses, thoughts, reas

It’s not even told, it continues a text (or denoises an image) in a way that closely resembles what was in the training data. Experience, senses, thoughts, reasoning and motivation were all there in original human- and nature-produced data. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43003186 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43003186 Doesn’t mean the result is ideal, far from that. But your “bullet points” imply some specialness which has to be explained. Personally I don’t love the style of refusal you’re demonstrating, because it’s similar to if you know you know and other self-referential nonsense. At least add some becauses into your arguments, because “it has no X” is a simplification far below the level of usefulness here. Anyway, how does that prevent creating AI personas again?