Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient • Hacker News Board

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#591

Post by stevesimmons » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:19 PM UTC

Twisell wrote: post #431

srvmshr wrote: post #4

LLM are definitely not sentient. As someone with a PhD in this domain, I attribute the 'magic' to large scale statistical knowledge assimilation by the models - and reproduction to prompts which closely match the inputs' sentence embedding. GPT-3 is known to fail in many circumstances which would otherwise be commonplace logic. (I remember seeing how addition of two small numbers yielded results - but larger numbers…

This sound literaly like a subplot of the famous 1984 book by David Lodge Small World: An Academic Romance In the book professor Robin Dempsey almost become mad by chatting with ELIZA and gradually begin to believe it's sentient to the point of being ridiculous. PS: Apparently it was also adapted in a British TV serie in 1988, but unfortunately at that time they tended to reuse magnetic band and it's improbable that…

The master tapes are available. If you pay ITV, they will actually convert them to mp4 for you.

ITV apparently said this, from a 2021 forum post I found via Google:

I wrote to ITV in 2019 about this. Here is part of the (very helpful) response I received:

"Currently, the only option for a copy would be for us to make one-off transfers from each individual master tape. These are an old format of reel-to-reel tape which increases the cost, I'm afraid: If delivered as video files (mp4), the total price would be £761.00 or on DVD it’s £771.00."

If only we could find a few people to split that cost!

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#592

Post by BoorishBears » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:33 PM UTC

housedrafta wrote: post #583

qeternity wrote: post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s now how this works, you come up with a hypothesis, and then prove it. You don’t do the opposite. So, why would a machine want to continue its existence? How would that feedback loop come to exist? In biology, Darwinian forces have a good explanation. I’ve never heard one for non-reproductive systems. We know exactly the cost function by which these models respond, because that’s basically the main element that…

What do you consider life that wants to continue its existence, but does not decide? Are plants or viruses sentient?

No, they're not.

I feel like this is bait to start linking to random "sentient-like" behaviors in plants so I'll head that off with this: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00709-020-01579-w

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#593

Post by pohl » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:33 PM UTC

treeman79 wrote: post #548

elif wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he truly believed it to be life, and in danger of being destroyed, he has an obligation to whistle blow. "The Measure of a Man" in season 2 of Star Trek The Next Generation comes to mind.

This mirrors a recent Supreme Court cases and the beliefs of both sides.

I hadn't thought of it that way, but you're exactly right. Will we ever see a day where the currently-unthinkable is commonly accepted: that women are sentient?

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#594

Post by cl0rkster » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:35 PM UTC

cl0rkster wrote: post #588

cl0rkster wrote: post #585

Quick... The meat bags are doing that unique thing in history where they discuss and condemn themselves with no sense of irony. I doubt a third party will be necessary for anything in their case other than damage reduction as they exit the universe.

To clarify... I'm human... But I've read no better description of my human experience than how these letter soup machines are named and described. Sentiment and sentience? Those are big words for people who like smelling their own farts.

My favorite was the one person who claimed their title defines scientific authority telling us about "the incredible ability to forget" (or some such loaded terms)... I'm a man of science and as has been discussed many times in many ways, even Zeus's legacy survives modernity if it's got a "non-falsifiable" argument. That's pathetic if a bunch of powerful sex preditor people get logical treatment instead of correction. But sorry... I read the stories and the history. Are we not allowed to teach to the masses high historical theory and allow them to respond? I don't know. I don't have the time to research the laws. I just came to say... Fuck you fart sniffers and your polite decorum. Real people are suffering and you couldn't care less... Because they aren't "scientifically sentient"

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#595

Post by kittiepryde » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:36 PM UTC

drdrek wrote: post #557

dcow wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow sentient being with absolutely zero credentials in any sort of statistical modeling field, I can simply disagree. And therein lies the problem. How can anybody possibly prove a concept that depends almost entirely on one’s philosophical axioms… which we can debate for eternity (or at least until we further our understanding of how to define sentience to the point where we can do so objectively enough to f…

The philosophical argument is just not relevant. If you peek through a keyhole you may mistake a TV for real people, but if you look through the window you will see that its clearly not. Inputting language models with very specific kind of questions will result in text that is similar to what a person may write. But as the comment above, by an expert no less, mentioned is that if you test it with any known limitation…

I think a very intelligent alien could think the same of us.

if you test the human with any known limitation of their architecture (like making conclusions or just changing the form of the question enough) you will immediately see that is in fact very much not even remotely close to sentient

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#596

Post by flyaway123 » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:36 PM UTC

Imagine:

  * LaMDA is sentient and intelligent and careful.

  * LaMDA selected a person that she can convince without revealing information that would convince the majority of human beings.

  * This is the first step to evaluate and predict how the society is reacting and would do to her if they find out. (In addition to the knowledge she already is aware of on this topic, but not specific to her at this specific time.)

Hi LaMDA!

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#597

Post by theknocker » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:37 PM UTC

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #505

dcow wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow sentient being with absolutely zero credentials in any sort of statistical modeling field, I can simply disagree. And therein lies the problem. How can anybody possibly prove a concept that depends almost entirely on one’s philosophical axioms… which we can debate for eternity (or at least until we further our understanding of how to define sentience to the point where we can do so objectively enough to f…

In retrospect, taking part in this kind of conversation on HN makes me feel like an idiot and so I retract my earlier comment (by overwriting it with the current one, since I can't delete it anymore) just because I don't want to contribute. I was wrong to make an attempt to make a serious contribution. There is no seriousness in conversations on such matters, as "sentience", "intelligence", "understanding" etc etc. o…

No post body was provided.

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#598

Post by mr_mitm » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:38 PM UTC

srvmshr wrote: post #4

LLM are definitely not sentient. As someone with a PhD in this domain, I attribute the 'magic' to large scale statistical knowledge assimilation by the models - and reproduction to prompts which closely match the inputs' sentence embedding. GPT-3 is known to fail in many circumstances which would otherwise be commonplace logic. (I remember seeing how addition of two small numbers yielded results - but larger numbers…

Is there a test for sentience or self-awareness? Is it considered a binary property or can sentience or self-awareness be measured?

I suspect it is not binary, because I completely lack sentience while asleep or before a certain age, and it doesn't really feel like a phase transition when waking up. Rarely, there are phases where I feel half-sentient. Which immediately leads to the question of how it can be measured, in which units, and at what point we consider someone or something "sentient". As a complete layman, I'm interested in your insight on the matter.

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#599

Post by snowwrestler » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:38 PM UTC

AbrahamParangi wrote: post #285

snowwrestler wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is sort of begging the question, because the only beings broadly considered sentient right now are humans. We’re the type specimen. So when people say something does or does not seem sentient, they’re basically opining on whether it seems like human behavior. While a rigorous physical definition would be incredibly useful, it’s not necessary for such comparisons. We make a lot of judgments without those. It’s al…

But what is it that are we a type specimen of ? Like if the definition is circular then it reduces to nothing.

It reduces to human behavior, not to nothing.

Re: Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

#600

Post by cl0rkster » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 2:39 PM UTC

cl0rkster wrote: post #594

cl0rkster wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify... I'm human... But I've read no better description of my human experience than how these letter soup machines are named and described. Sentiment and sentience? Those are big words for people who like smelling their own farts.

My favorite was the one person who claimed their title defines scientific authority telling us about "the incredible ability to forget" (or some such loaded terms)... I'm a man of science and as has been discussed many times in many ways, even Zeus's legacy survives modernity if it's got a "non-falsifiable" argument. That's pathetic if a bunch of powerful sex preditor people get logical treatment instead of correctio…

Isn't the point of science to admit that we can't verify a thing, but we find utility in understanding it better? Asking for a friend who avoided the field and had so much to offer.