5 ms·
Everyone has a "world model". These models just differ on how much they care about various things. No one has a "world model" which literally encompasses everyt
by vintermann 1y ago
Everyone has a "world model". These models just differ on how much they care about various things. No one has a "world model" which literally encompasses everything about the world, that wouldn't be a model at all, it'd just be the world, much like a 1:1 map.
Also, no one has a "world model" that is purely based on experiment and reason. Everyone gets their beliefs via other people first and foremost. Some get it from few people, some get it from many people (many people can still be wrong!).
For code, you may have the model of what it does strictly from reason and experience - but probably only if you're the only author. And you can still damn well be wrong, as we all know.
- AstralStorm 1y agoFor a lot of people, the world models are really rough and incomplete, so they really really on common opinion on these matters. This is the same if you tried asking a general populace ethical questions in a vacuum sneakily. You're going to be dismayed after collecting the set of approved behaviors per culture. There's not really a way to evaluate one of these.
- Mallowram 1y ago[dead]
- Lambdanaut 1y agoI love how this comment chain goes directly from > Humans don't have world models To > Of course humans have world models To > You fools, there is no such thing as a "world model" and you are all hamsters! Classic Socratic dialogue.
- Mallowram 1y agoThe problem is, neurobiology proves there are no world models. Silicon Valley bet on the wrong cognition model, a psychological version trapped in 20th C bunk, and everyone pays the price listening to cult leaders like Scott Alexander worm their way out of consciousness. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7415918/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7415918/
- lukev 1y agoHow can you say there are no world models, when I can literally draw out a simple one for you on demand? You can argue that's they're not the governing principle of cognition, but it seems farcical to say they don't even exist, when we are trying to explain them to eachother all the time.
- mallowdram 1y agoNo what you're describing is arbitrary and idiosyncratic. The brain doesn't use that to survive, it doesn't need them. Anything external to that is completely separate from thought. What you're describing is an arbitrary game for entertainment to fill up your time and confuse yourself and others. It has no relationship to the choices you would make to survive, and can only interfere with it. The "world model" you're describing is arbitrary fiction. “We refute (based on empirical evidence) claims that humans use linguistic representations to think.” Ev Fedorenko Language Lab MIT 2024
- Izkata 1y agoWorld models aren't linguistic. You seem to be conflating (at least) two different things, then claiming because one doesn't apply the other doesn't exist. Edit: Also come to think of it, that quote is odd, like it's rather late to the party. The NPC meme is several years old and came from a study that most people don't have an inner voice - that they don't think with words.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]