DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

Post by chpatrick » Thu, Sep 10, 2026, 5:44 PM UTC

sirwhinesalot wrote: post #143

Certhas wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your definition of sentient? Or, maybe more precisely, consciousness? I think it's reasonable to at least start thinking about these questions. It has long been established that LLMs have good theory of mind [1]. And there is a bunch of empirical research about all sorts of capabilities that we typically associate with consciousness [2], like identity [3] and metacognition [4]. The METR report shows agents sac…

Not the same person but to me, the answer is that it does not matter, and that all these attempts at making it matter are pure marketing and emotional manipulation. It's not a living creature. It's an autoregressive pure function of token-sequence to token, which is capable of incredible things, but it's still just a function. It is not alive as it cannot die in any meaningful sense. It is less "alive" than the RNA m…

Post by ekidd » Thu, Sep 10, 2026, 5:45 PM UTC

nozzlegear wrote: post #451

1f60c wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> welfare We should be paying attention to it just in case it ends up mattering enormously. It's cheap insurance. Aside from that, US labs' system cards have been pretty useless for a while—I think the last great one was the combined system card for Claude 4 Sonnet and Opus.

> We should be paying attention to it just in case it ends up mattering enormously. It's cheap insurance. This sounds a lot like the argument some people give for praying and going to church even if you aren't a believer. "You should be doing it just in case God ends up being real."

Post by joshheitzman » Thu, Sep 10, 2026, 5:46 PM UTC

IshKebab wrote: post #441

mrob wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe consciousness is necessarily stateful. The LLM itself (ignoring implementation details that don't change the results) is a deterministic pure function. It's functionally equivalent to an enormous lookup table. If I accepted LLMs as conscious, then I would have to accept panpsychism, which I do not, and which most other humans also act as though they do not.

I don't think so because any stateful function can be made stateless just by making its state an input, and vice versa. They're mathematically equivalent, so it would be super weird if it had any implications for consciousness.

Post by orangeboats » Thu, Sep 10, 2026, 5:49 PM UTC

jrflo wrote: post #376

nater5000 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it really amazes me how fearless Deepseek are Reel it in a bit, man.

The circle jerking of Chinese models on this site never ceases to amuse me.

Post by zargon » Thu, Sep 10, 2026, 5:50 PM UTC

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #285

arc619 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No language models are programmed, they are "grown" or evolved from data. There's no print statements or human entered logic involved in the raw model expression at all. The only thing that humans have programmed is efficient parallel dot product pipelines that "animate" (for lack of a better word) the models. Everything these models do is emergent from their backpropgation guided evolution. This even includes in con…

You have completely misunderstood what I was saying so badly I can't even formulate a response other than to suggest you read my reply again. I was not suggesting that LLMs are programmed with print statements, for fuck's sake.