5 ms·
At this point you have to start entertaining the question of what is the difference between general intelligence and a "sufficiently complicated" next token pre
by Mahn 1y ago
At this point you have to start entertaining the question of what is the difference between general intelligence and a "sufficiently complicated" next token prediction algorithm.
- dontlikeyoueith 1y agoA sufficiently large lookup table in DB is mathematically indistinguishable from a sufficiently complicated next token prediction algorithm is mathematically indistinguishable from general intelligence. All that means is that treating something as a black box doesn't tell you anything about what's inside the box.
- int_19h 1y agoWhy do we care, so long as the box can genuinely reason about things?
- chipsrafferty 1y agoWhat if the box has spiders in it
- dontlikeyoueith 1y ago:facepalm: I ... did you respond to the wrong comment? Or do you actually think the DB table can genuinely reason about things?
- int_19h 1y agoOf course it can. Reasoning is algorithmic in nature, and algorithms can be encoded as sufficiently large state transition tables. I don't buy into Searle's "it can't reason because of course it can't" nonsense.
- zeroonetwothree 1y agoIt can do something but I wouldn’t call it reasoning. IMO a reasoning algorithmic must be more complex than a lookup table.
- int_19h 1y agoWe were talking about a "sufficiently large" table, which means that it can be larger than realistic hardware allows for. Any algorithm operating on bounded memory can be ultimately encoded as a finite state automaton with the table defining all valid state transitions.
- dontlikeyoueith 1y agoThis is such a confusion of ideas that I don't even know how to respond any more. Good luck.