4 ms·
No, the other comments pointing out that LLMs do not have senses and because of that they do not "experience" an apple at all are correct. When given a sequenc
by solid_fuel 2mo ago
No, the other comments pointing out that LLMs do not have senses and because of that they do not "experience" an apple at all are correct.
When given a sequence of tokens e.g. "an apple tastes " an LLM performs a mathematical transformation that modifies the input tokens using the stored weights within the model to predict the most statistically likely next token(s) (which may be "sweet and crisp...").
It's important to understand how these things work - and how different they are from a human brain. Despite it being a common point of confusion, the architecture of a transformer is massively different from the neural architecture of a human brain - and the human brain isn't just neurons. Just as a start, if you ever look at some of the attempts to map synaptic networks in brains you will notice they are full of recurrent loops, while a transform is feed-forward only. There's also tons of mediating chemicals, several (known) distinct kinds of synapses, and other kinds of cells as well.
Just one example of the consequences of these differences: LLMs stop "experiencing" anything once a stop token has been generated. Meanwhile, Humans in sensory deprivation tanks may hallucinate vividly - but keep thinking.
This is pretty simple, CS101 stuff.
- esikich 2mo agoTell me why only human brains are capable of whatever thought, conscious, or experience is (if you can define them) and I'll congratulate you on solving the hard problem of consciousness.
- Windchaser 2mo agoReading both your comments, I don't see them suggest that only human brains are capable of experience. Not even "only animal brains", for that matter.
- solid_fuel 2mo agoThe above from `esikich` is just a classic response from LLM maximalists. I point out that LLMs and actual brains - like found in nature - are vastly different in architecture and that the differences create actual, material issues when considering if LLMs are conscious. Instead of actually addressing any of the points, they just pull the classic "well no one has fully solved consciousness so my supposition that LLMs are conscious must be as good as any argument against it." It's not really worth debating further, since they aren't actually arguing from a reasoned position, but I appreciate that some people are actually taking time to read the arguments presented.
- poetaster 2mo agoI'll go so far as to propose that many brains, dog or cat, certainly display 'signs' of consciousness. They are nothing like LLMs either. Confusing some stream of language with consciousness is missing the a priori.
- solid_fuel 2mo agoWell yes, I would say that furthers my point though. Cats, dogs, flies, toads... they all display an embodied behavior and internal motivation that LLMs completely lack. Cats and dogs are typically considered both conscious and sentient for what it's worth - no language required.
- ricardobeat 2mo agoCS101 != philosophy