5 ms·
> They're word-association mechanisms with no embodiment and no way to associate the text vectors they manipulate with real-world phenomena. Doesn't most of th
by andai 3mo ago
> They're word-association mechanisms with no embodiment and no way to associate the text vectors they manipulate with real-world phenomena.
Doesn't most of this also apply to a guy living in The Matrix?
- ben_w 3mo agoYes, but also for humans who learn of distant lands by reading (books or news, just so long as it's reading). And also these models have been associating with real-world phenomena from the first moment their training data did, and also those text vectors are (to varying degrees) associated with corresponding image vectors in multimodal models. Of course, the Plato's cave critique would still be valid.
- ericpauley 3mo agoSearle* strikes again! * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
- satvikpendem 3mo agoAlso, AI effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect
- scarmig 3mo agoEmbodiment doesn't exist, even in regular humans. We do not have direct access to reality; we have sensory inputs that are much lower bandwidth than one might expect but correlate with external events, and our brain uses them to form rich world models that are usefully predictive. Most of the world we experience is just in our head.
- logicallee 3mo agoI get what you're saying (mostly based on low bandwidth from sensory organs as opposed to direct access to reality), but your conclusion that we therefore don't have embodiment goes very far. It would be like saying planes don't really fly, since they fly by wire and only have limited inputs and outputs, rather than direct access to reality itself. Well, yeah, they fly using sensors rather than knowing reality itself, but they're still flying. Humans still obviously have embodiment.
- tim333 3mo agoI'm not quite sure of the definitions but with sentience I have >Subjective Experience: Involves raw sensory awareness rather than complex abstract thought On that current AI is a bit lacking as they don't have very good sensors whereas human brains are pretty wired up for touch, smell, sight, sound and the like. AIs do get linked to cameras though and could improve a lot in those directions.
- scarmig 3mo ago> On that current AI is a bit lacking as they don't have very good sensors whereas human brains are pretty wired up for touch, smell, sight, sound and the like. For sight and sound, the sensory input layer for AIs is much, much richer in terms of bitrate, though is redundant. > AIs do get linked to cameras though and could improve a lot in those directions. Video is an interesting one, as most AI systems use the full pixel information of a scene, while human vision is much more temporal, focusing primarily on logistic deltas rather than raw pixels. That's not inherent to hardware (e.g. see event or "neuromorphic" cameras), but it's a significant difference. My more sympathetic reading of embodiment is that the relative paucity of the human sensory stream is part of what makes us work better than current AI in many domains, in that it forces us to form richer, temporal world models from a low bitrate stream of salient events instead of relying on shallow responses to rich sensory data.
- yladiz 3mo agoDefine “direct”, “access”, and “reality”.
- andai 3mo agoWell here's a fun one. If the outside is simulated, why not the inside?