3 ms·

Odd. Why don't the details of how consciousness arises in one system inform your judgment of whether it can exist in a different system that only has partial s

Odd. Why don't the details of how consciousness arises in one system inform your judgment of whether it can exist in a different system that only has partial structural overlap? Seems wildly convenient. Where else in science can you show me such a comparable situation in how you define properties?

lern_too_spel 2mo ago
> Why don't the details of how consciousness arises in one system inform your judgment of whether it can exist in a different system that only has partial structural overlap? A light bulb doesn't need to do fusion to make light. An airplane doesn't need to flap its wings to fly. An ANN doesn't need to use a brain's structure to think.
- randomImmigrant 1mo ago
  You haven’t proven an LLM has thought. I can measure the spectral properties of light from both a bulb and the sun. I can measure the dynamics that go with thought in a human. I can measure some dynamics in an LLM. From all we know, there are huge differences, not least that you can literally turn off an LLM, whereas every process but death in biology shows continued activity even when the organism “looks” off, What you haven’t shown me is that what the LLM does when it is on is “thinking”. Given that the dynamics are different, the substrate is different, and one can be fully turned off and the other cannot, why are these two things the same?
  - lern_too_spel 1mo ago
    > You haven’t proven an LLM has thought Give me any problem that previously required human thinking. Any. That can be solved by LLMs. All you have to do is provide a single counterexample. > not least that you can literally turn off an LLM, whereas every process but death in biology shows continued activity even when the organism “looks” off, There is no reasonable definition of thinking that requires that it can't be paused. > why are these two things the same? I said they aren't the same, just as a bulb isn't the same as a star. An LLM can think, just as a human brain can think. A bulb can produce light, just as a star can produce light.
    - randomImmigrant 1mo ago
      >Give me any problem that previously required human thinking. Any. That can be solved by LLMs. All you have to do is provide a single counterexample. Theres an itch deep in my butt, but I'm in an important meeting and can't leave the seat. Nor can I openly scratch the area. I can tell myself these things, focus on the itching, think about how itching is felt by the body, think about the social consequences, and make it feel more bearable. Please tell me which LLM has solved this problem so I can not outsource the issue to it. I eagerly await your answer. > There is no reasonable definition of thinking that requires that it can't be paused. Is there a reasonable definition of thinking where the words "paused" and "turned off" aren't treated the same? Can you do that kind of thinking and get back to me? > I said they aren't the same, just as a bulb isn't the same as a star. An LLM can think, just as a human brain can think. A bulb can produce light, just as a star can produce light. An LLM can produce language. You are yet to show me it produces thinking. Your claim is like saying the bulb produces light, so it also goes through fusion.
      - lern_too_spel 1mo ago
        > Theres an itch deep in my butt, The LLM will tell you how to solve it. If you mean the LLM should modify your thoughts, no human could do that for you either, but an LLM agent can just as easily as a human figure out how to build the brain computer interface to make this possible in the future. > Is there a reasonable definition of thinking where the words "paused" and "turned off" aren't treated the same? No reasonable definition of thinking requires that thinking can't be paused or turned off. Please state your point more clearly. > You are yet to show me it produces thinking. Every problem that previously required human thought can be solved by LLM. QED. > Your claim is like saying the bulb produces light, so it also goes through fusion. No. How many times do I have to explain that the mechanism of thinking is not the same, just as the mechanism of producing light is not the same? You need to think to understand this, which is something that frontier LLMs have no problem with, but which most humans struggle with.
        randomImmigrant 1mo ago

lern_too_spel 2mo ago

> Why don't the details of how consciousness arises in one system inform your judgment of whether it can exist in a different system that only has partial structural overlap? A light bulb doesn't need to do fusion to make light. An airplane doesn't need to flap its wings to fly. An ANN doesn't need to use a brain's structure to think.

randomImmigrant 1mo ago
You haven’t proven an LLM has thought. I can measure the spectral properties of light from both a bulb and the sun. I can measure the dynamics that go with thought in a human. I can measure some dynamics in an LLM. From all we know, there are huge differences, not least that you can literally turn off an LLM, whereas every process but death in biology shows continued activity even when the organism “looks” off, What you haven’t shown me is that what the LLM does when it is on is “thinking”. Given that the dynamics are different, the substrate is different, and one can be fully turned off and the other cannot, why are these two things the same?
- lern_too_spel 1mo ago
  > You haven’t proven an LLM has thought Give me any problem that previously required human thinking. Any. That can be solved by LLMs. All you have to do is provide a single counterexample. > not least that you can literally turn off an LLM, whereas every process but death in biology shows continued activity even when the organism “looks” off, There is no reasonable definition of thinking that requires that it can't be paused. > why are these two things the same? I said they aren't the same, just as a bulb isn't the same as a star. An LLM can think, just as a human brain can think. A bulb can produce light, just as a star can produce light.
  - randomImmigrant 1mo ago
    >Give me any problem that previously required human thinking. Any. That can be solved by LLMs. All you have to do is provide a single counterexample. Theres an itch deep in my butt, but I'm in an important meeting and can't leave the seat. Nor can I openly scratch the area. I can tell myself these things, focus on the itching, think about how itching is felt by the body, think about the social consequences, and make it feel more bearable. Please tell me which LLM has solved this problem so I can not outsource the issue to it. I eagerly await your answer. > There is no reasonable definition of thinking that requires that it can't be paused. Is there a reasonable definition of thinking where the words "paused" and "turned off" aren't treated the same? Can you do that kind of thinking and get back to me? > I said they aren't the same, just as a bulb isn't the same as a star. An LLM can think, just as a human brain can think. A bulb can produce light, just as a star can produce light. An LLM can produce language. You are yet to show me it produces thinking. Your claim is like saying the bulb produces light, so it also goes through fusion.
    - lern_too_spel 1mo ago
      > Theres an itch deep in my butt, The LLM will tell you how to solve it. If you mean the LLM should modify your thoughts, no human could do that for you either, but an LLM agent can just as easily as a human figure out how to build the brain computer interface to make this possible in the future. > Is there a reasonable definition of thinking where the words "paused" and "turned off" aren't treated the same? No reasonable definition of thinking requires that thinking can't be paused or turned off. Please state your point more clearly. > You are yet to show me it produces thinking. Every problem that previously required human thought can be solved by LLM. QED. > Your claim is like saying the bulb produces light, so it also goes through fusion. No. How many times do I have to explain that the mechanism of thinking is not the same, just as the mechanism of producing light is not the same? You need to think to understand this, which is something that frontier LLMs have no problem with, but which most humans struggle with.
      - randomImmigrant 1mo ago