LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
theintrinsicperspective.com
LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
1–10 of 19 posts
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#2Has anybody publicly argued the extreme opposite: they are conscious, but with the exception of writing ability they're really dumb, and we're cloning, enslaving, gaslighting and killing these various species of writer-savant idiots by the millions? Just for the sake of seeing if anybody agrees?
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#3I've read so many versions of this idea over the last few years and I don't understand what the point is. It's either obviously true (humans have this thing we call consciousness and by definition it's specific to humans or organic minds so therefore silicon can't have it) and therefore not worth saying or it needs to be said in some falsifiable way "an AI would be called conscious if it could fulfil conditions A, B, C".
But usually it's some long manifesto about loving a baby or experiencing hunger or something. I'm not saying I disagree or that I believe that AI is "conscious" I'm just not sure what the point of the debate is and what this word 'consciousness' (that philosophers have anyway been debating the meaning of for centuries) has to add to the AI discourse.
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#4It doesn't really matter whether or not LLMs are conscious. They provide a convincing enough imitation that people are falling all over themselves to ruin our economy, decimate our workforce, etc. for their sake.
The philosophical angle is interesting, but the practical effects have changed, and will continue to change, everything.
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#5I've read so many versions of this idea over the last few years and I don't understand what the point is. It's either obviously true (humans have this thing we call consciousness and by definition it's specific to humans or organic minds so therefore silicon can't have it) and therefore not worth saying or it needs to be said in some falsifiable way "an AI would be called conscious if it could fulfil conditions A, B,…
[dead]
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#6I've read so many versions of this idea over the last few years and I don't understand what the point is. It's either obviously true (humans have this thing we call consciousness and by definition it's specific to humans or organic minds so therefore silicon can't have it) and therefore not worth saying or it needs to be said in some falsifiable way "an AI would be called conscious if it could fulfil conditions A, B,…
Putting it simply:
* Your AI girlfriend isn't real
* "You're correct" is a statistical occurrence, not evidence that you are or are not correct.
* Llm can do "bad things" because it just does things. Statistics has no right or wrong.
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#7It doesn't really matter whether or not LLMs are conscious. They provide a convincing enough imitation that people are falling all over themselves to ruin our economy, decimate our workforce, etc. for their sake. The philosophical angle is interesting, but the practical effects have changed, and will continue to change, everything.
[dead]
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#8The general public will not care about these debates. If they have an individual humanoid AI that they've gone through many good times and bad and know each other throughout, they will be treated as a valued immediate member. Labels don't matter, just behaviour less of AI's but of humans. Shared experiences, values, and predictable behviour count for a lot (maybe everything).
An interesting shift is in how we routinely say "AI" and people hardly ever push back, vs saying "LLM" which how sounds pedantic in many contexts.
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#9I've read so many versions of this idea over the last few years and I don't understand what the point is. It's either obviously true (humans have this thing we call consciousness and by definition it's specific to humans or organic minds so therefore silicon can't have it) and therefore not worth saying or it needs to be said in some falsifiable way "an AI would be called conscious if it could fulfil conditions A, B,…
Putting it simply: * Your AI girlfriend isn't real * "You're correct" is a statistical occurrence, not evidence that you are or are not correct. * Llm can do "bad things" because it just does things. Statistics has no right or wrong.
What does AI girlfriend have to do with consciousness? It’s easily possible to be conscious and fake being in love with me.
Source: life
Re: LLMs aren't conscious (and thinking they are is culturally dangerous)
#10A lot of words in this post and yet the author doesn’t ever define the word “consciousness”. The closest they get is mentioning their past work on information systems.
Folks, how can we debate whether LLMs are conscious if no two people can agree on what the word even means?