631–640 of 643 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't insult me.
It's not an insult. "People are deterministic" is news to me, so I'd really rather like to know which papers claimed that.
Have a nice day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not really true. Slave owners were perfectly aware that slaves were humans.
Black people being supposedly "inferior sub-humans" was one of the primary justifications for their treatment.
Look, I do not have a scooby if current AI models are conscious and I strongly suspect it’s a meaningless question, but sooner or later we will need to address whether or not a certain thing is or isn’t a person, and we’d better not screw it up as badly as the Founding Fathers.
Why don't we start with the animals then? It should be far easier to confer consciousness onto something which already meets the definition of "alive", has a divergent evolution path from ours, and displays many traits present in humanity such as emotion, a desire to continue its own life, and (to varying degrees) concepts of a social structure based around their immediate family members. Of course thats not actually…
1. it's not consciousness we really value, it's intelligence 2. LLMs are not tasty
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not an insult. "People are deterministic" is news to me, so I'd really rather like to know which papers claimed that.
Sorry friend, between this and the vague memories I have of you harassing me, I think I'm not going to answer. I'm sure you can get an LLM to explain it to you. Have a nice day.
Not a problem; this is the playbook all the all-in AI boosters run to when they are called on their claims. Everyone reading this knows exactly what your claims meant, because the majority of HN have seen this trick before.
You can pretend all you want that you're just being polite, but the truth is there is no research backing your claims.
Regards,
A former research scientist, current business owner.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I do find it strange that 50% of ai researchers and the public seem to think there will be a way of determining if these systems are conscious. I think it's likely they're using a different definition than you. Seeing as there is no agreed upon definition, after all. Regardless - I post this list because the article makes a bold claim at the beginning - and I wanted to demonstrate that in fact there is no consensus…
The definition presented in the survey is the one I have in mind. You may be suggesting that the respondents have a distinct one in mind though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry friend, between this and the vague memories I have of you harassing me, I think I'm not going to answer. I'm sure you can get an LLM to explain it to you. Have a nice day.
> Sorry friend, [...] Have a nice day. Not a problem; this is the playbook all the all-in AI boosters run to when they are called on their claims. Everyone reading this knows exactly what your claims meant, because the majority of HN have seen this trick before. You can pretend all you want that you're just being polite, but the truth is there is no research backing your claims. Regards, A former research scientist,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The model does not. The system it runs in can. My agents have persistent memory. It is not at all clear whether or the distinction that the long-term memory is external from the model matters.
> My agents have persistent memory. So your disc drive likewise experiences emotions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t have a good answer beyond common-sense intuition. It’s precisely because I don’t have a good answer that I leave open the possibility. But to extrapolate a bit, theres a sense in which it cashes out to a difference between abstracted representation and embodiment. If GFLOPS can be conscious, does that mean a billion scribes doing those operations on paper would also have consciousness, even identical consciou…
I’m broadly skeptical that atoms and electricity can be conscious
I appreciate his openness. > Unfortunately, there’s a growing chorus of people who argue that AIs could now be, or may soon become, conscious. They argue that AIs may deserve rights and protections similar to those that we provide other conscious beings.12 If this view takes hold, it will shake the foundations of our society, rupturing our existing political and ethical frameworks, and fundamentally changing what it…
Do people argue this way about animals? To me it’s a very depressing reality that more people seem willing to believe AI systems are conscious than dairy cows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmm let me try then. AI agents do not experience real time. This is understandable given their design, but it’s also something we have good empirical evidence for. They cannot, especially over the long horizon, track how much real time has passed as they complete their tasks. And they are not off by a few minutes but often bizarrely off, even mixing across past present and future. Biology, on the other hand, is nothi…
I also don't experience real time without constantly referring to a clock.
Maybe talk to a neurologist about that. Sounds like some kind of disorder.