4 ms·
This is the equivalent of a toddler being entertained by the sound the straps on their Velcro shoes make when they get peeled back and forth.
by IhateAI 8mo ago
This is the equivalent of a toddler being entertained by the sound the straps on their Velcro shoes make when they get peeled back and forth.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- lolaccurate 8mo agoTo be fair, that’s about the intelligence level of the “humans” looking at the site and enjoying it. “The rocks are conscious” people are dumber than toddlers.
- donkeybeer 8mo agoRocks are conscious people have more sense than those with the strange supernatural belief in special souls that make humans different from any other physical system.
- donkeybeer 8mo agoNo I'd really like to understand. Are people who make this weird argument aware that they believe in souls and ok with it or do they think they don't believe in souls? You tell me which you are.
- namero999 8mo agoI might be misunderstanding GP but I take it to mean "rock are conscious" => "silicon is conscious" => "agents are conscious", which might appeal to some uneducated audience, and create fascination around these stochastic parrots. Which is obviously ridiculous because its premises are still rooted in physicalism, which failed hard on its face to account for anything even tangentially related to subjectivity (which has nothing to do with the trivial mainstream conception of "soul").
- donkeybeer 8mo agoWhy not, we are physical systems, computers are physical systems. If not soul, what is this magical non physical special sauce that makes us special and makes it easy to claim silicon is not conscious.
- namero999 8mo agoI don't know, you tell me: how do you _exactly_ go from quantities to qualities? Keep in mind that the "physical" is a model of our perception and nothing else.
- donkeybeer 8mo agoWhat are quantities and qualities? Does exciting electrical and chemical signals in the brain and therefore inducing emotions or perceptions factor into this or is it out of scope? Or are you saying its more like a large scale state like heat in physics. If you what is it you seek beyond being able to identify the states associated with perceptions? If you are saying these "qualities" are non-verbal. Very well, do you mean non-verbal as not among the usual human languages like English, French, German, or do you mean in the most general sense as not representable by any alphabet set. We represent images, video, audio etc freely in various choices of alphabet daily on computers, so I am sure you didn't mean in that sense.
- namero999 8mo agoThat's the point in contention, how to go from "electrical and chemical signals" (the quantities, mole, charge, mass, momentum, coulomb, spin) to qualities (emotions, perception, first-person perspective, private inner life, subjectivity). The jump you are making is the woo part: we have no in-principle avenue to explain this gap, so accepting it is a religious move. There is no evidence of such directed causal link, yet it is (generally) accepted on faith. If you think there is a logical and coherent way to resolve the so called "hard problem of consciousness" which doesn't result in a category error, we are all ears. The Nobel committee is too. I agree that claiming that rocks are conscious on account of them being physical systems, like brains are, is at the very least coherent. However you would excuse if such claim is met with skepticism, as rock (and CPUs) don't look like brains at all, as long as one does not ignore countless layers of abstractions. You can't argue for rationality and hold materialism/physicalism at the same time.
- emp17344 8mo agoA belief that LLMs are not conscious does not necessitate a belief in souls. The two positions are not mutually exclusive.
- donkeybeer 8mo agoI am asking him to clarify whether he believes its simply impossible for anything human to be conscious, or that he thinks current LLM's are not conscious but its quite possible for a physical system to be conscious just like the physical system called Human is conscious.
- dec0dedab0de 8mo agoI don't believe in souls, and it makes me much happier than when I believed in souls as a child. Though, I have never heard any theist claim that a soul is required for consciousness. Is that what you believe?
- donkeybeer 8mo agoI am just asking him to clarify if he things "rocks" can't be conscious simply because they are not human or because he just thinks its not yet at a level but there is no argument against any other physical system being conscious just like the physical system that is a human.
- donkeybeer 8mo agoRocks? And what are humans made of? Magic juice?
- cyanydeez 8mo agoOr ammosexuals joining ICE so they can shoot people.