71–80 of 140 posts
Wow this paper is bad. I was expecting little and received genuine crackpottery. It's hard to critique this paper directly because its claims are so incoherent and decorated with so much obnoxious verbiage[1] that people aren't going to believe me when I point out what the claims actually are. Regardless, this is their paper: First, they conflate the substrate with the presentation layer. Then, they point out that Tu…
Either human-like attributes can be described using physics or they are magic. If they can be described using physics then they can be simulated. If they can be simulated then they can be simulated in any Turing complete system, include AoE II.
Physically describable doesn't mean computable. You're making too many unjustified logical leaps which makes your argument circular & conflates "physical" w/ "computable".
Either human-like attributes can be described using physics or they are magic. If they can be described using physics then they can be simulated. If they can be simulated then they can be simulated in any Turing complete system, include AoE II.
So, if I understand this correctly, this paper proves that LLMs can run on crude VMs?
isnt this essentially the tiktok tick effect: people who arw continually exposed to a certain cultural aphorism will start to align their behavior to the LLM and generate the psychosis of the LLM. humans are just to susceptible Age of empires cannot do this. hence, what matters is the reversibility of the semblence, not the semblence. LLMs do not do this readily, even if you can instruct them to, say, talk like a vam…
Here is communication being aligned with the Age of Empires chat taunt system: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48438516
This entire morality or consciousness "research" is just advertising or publication pressure. If you don't prompt an LLM, it does nothing. Automated prompting does not count. The damn thing is a huge approximation function from input to output. It learns morality from correct inputs. Remember Microslops's Tay chatbot? Remember MechaHitler? The whole industry is a Scientology cult by people who have read too much chea…
I'm not sure who this kind of thing is aimed at. I think the majority of people who are happy to anthropomorphise LLMs from a philosophical point of view (rather than those who just do it for convenience, the same way you might a cat or dog or stupid thermostat that never works right), are already completely happy with the notion that a computer game might have elements that are human like. They've already accepted t…
Another weird thing that keeps coming up - "people don't think that image models or chess models are conscious"... yes we do, and we have for many years. Or rather, we aren't *certain* that those things are conscious. But the idea that they might be is not strange.
this paper makes a lot of modest, carefully hedged, and reasonable claims. in its tone however it's written as if it's a brutal takedown of... somebody's perspective. It's hard to tell whose or what perspective exactly. Maybe I'm just misreading the writing style. (Personally, I think the general case here is one of the better objections to computationalism about consciousness. You can make it even more absurd. There…
Could you explain this in more detail? Not being argumentative, I want to understand this argument because I've made similar ones, although less crazy sounding.