Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 363 posts

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#181

Post by [deleted] »

dsign wrote: post #115
xigency wrote: post #56

Regarding dismissals of LLM’s on ‘technical’ grounds: Consciousness is first a word and second a concept. And it’s a word that ChatGPT or Llama can use in an English sentence better than billions of humans worldwide. The software folks have made even more progress than sociologists, psychologists and neuroscientists to be able to create an artificial language cortex before we understand our biological mind comprehens…

Exactly. To that I’m going to add that the blood of our civilization is culture (sciences, technology, arts, traditions). The moment there is something better at it than humans, it’s our “horse-moment”.

[deleted]

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#182

Post by [deleted] »

dsign wrote: post #115
xigency wrote: post #56

Regarding dismissals of LLM’s on ‘technical’ grounds: Consciousness is first a word and second a concept. And it’s a word that ChatGPT or Llama can use in an English sentence better than billions of humans worldwide. The software folks have made even more progress than sociologists, psychologists and neuroscientists to be able to create an artificial language cortex before we understand our biological mind comprehens…

Exactly. To that I’m going to add that the blood of our civilization is culture (sciences, technology, arts, traditions). The moment there is something better at it than humans, it’s our “horse-moment”.

[deleted]

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#183

Post by corethree »

throw0101a wrote: post #35

> But he could understand so much more than he could say. If you asked him to point to the vacuum cleaner, he would. Perhaps worth noting that it is possible to teach infants (often starting at around 9 months) sign language so that they can more easily signal their desires. Some priority recommended words would probably be: * hungry/more * enough/all done (for when they're full) * drink (perhaps both milk/formula an…

>Perhaps worth noting that it is possible to teach infants (often starting at around 9 months) sign language so that they can more easily signal their desires.

You can teach chatgpt too as well. It's like a toddler. A very articulate toddler:

https://chat.openai.com/share/40c94561-2505-4938-8331-7d10ae...

It makes mistakes as any human baby would. And as a parent you can correct it.

All this means is that learning an arbitrary sign language isn't a differentiator.

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#184

Post by famouswaffles »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #48
ImHereToVote wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except LLM's are built on neural networks. That are based on how neurons work. The first tech that actually copies aspects of us.

sigh Neural networks are not based on how neurons work. They do not copy aspects of us. They call them neural networks because they are sort of conceptually like networks of neurons in the brain but they’re so different as to make false the statement that they are based on neurons.

They are though. They quite literally are. Saying otherwise is like saying planes weren't based on how birds work when Wright brothers spent a lot of time in the 1800s studying birds.

Both Humans and GPT are neural networks. Who cares that GPT doesn't have feathers or flap its wings? That's not the question to care bout. We are interested in whether GPT flies. You can sigh to Kingdom come and nothing will change that.

We've developed numerous different learning algorithms that are biologically plausible, but they all kinda work like backpropagation but worse, so we stuck with backpropagation. We've made more complicated neurons that better resemble biological neurons, but it is faster and works better if you just add extra simple neurons, so we do that instead. Spiking neural networks have connection patterns more similar to what you see in the brain, but they learn slower and are tougher to work with than regular layered neural networks, so we use layered neural networks instead.

The Wright brothers probably experimented with gluing feathers onto their gliders, but eventually decided it wasn’t worth the effort. Because that's not what is important.

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#185

Post by chrbr »

PeterisP wrote: post #150
chrbr wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. A thought experiment I had recently: Let's say we could somehow train an LLM on all written and spoken language from the western Roman civilization (Republic + Western Empire, up until 476 AD/CE, just so I don't muddy the experiment with near-modern timelines). Would it, without novel information from humans, ever be able to spit out a correct predecessor of modern science like atomic theory? What about stea…

For your thought experiment, I'd assert that the key missing part is experimentation in the real world, as that is what acquires new information, not the complexity of human brains working together. If you took millions of genius-level immortal humans with all the same Roman data but had them sit in a blank, empty room with their hands tied and simply discuss philosophy for eternity, I'm certain that they would not b…

Yeah, I like that improvement/clarification. Good assertion. Now I wonder if it changes my stance: are the path modern LLMs are on ever going to replicate this environment for acquiring new information that humans currently operate in?

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#186

Post by fallingfrog »

This is not, not, not good. How am I going to convince my 8 year old that it’s worthwhile to learn to draw if an ai can do it for her? Or how to code or play a musical instrument? These skills take decades to perfect. And that means to maintain them they need to be useful and necessary for society.

Look: when a factory is outsourced to a different country, the people who worked there have no way to pass on their skills. In one generation the community knowledge is gone and if you move the factory back, you’re starting from scratch. Technology can be lost. It’s an emergent thing that comes from clusters of people doing the same thing and learning from each other.

If we stay on the path we are on: only hobbyists will be able to do these things, human effort will be unnecessary, and our minds will degrade and cease to be any use. Despite decades of Hollywood warning us of terminators and Hal 2000, the ai’s don’t need to attack us or try to kill us off to defeat us. They can destroy us just by trying to help.

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#187

Post by schwartzworld »

skeaker wrote: post #143
AlecSchueler wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not use a common sign language and give then a head start if they ever do want to use it outside the family?

They might not have the dexterity required for some of the more complex signs, I would guess. If you devise your own gestures they can be much simpler.

The signs chosen to teach to babies tend to be pretty simple. Things like "more" or "milk" are very easy.

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#189

Post by Davidzheng »

xigency wrote: post #164
drew-y wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree with the sentiment. I find the constant debates on "is AI conscious" or "can AI understand" exhausting. You can't have a sound argument when neither party even agrees on a concrete definition of consciousness or understanding. Regarding this line: > ChatGPT can already tell you a lot about itself (showing awareness) and will gladly walk you through its “thinking” if you ask politely. Is it actually walk…

> Is it actually walking you through its thinking? Or is it walking you through an imagined line of thinking? You can prompt an LLM model to provide reasoning first and an answer second and it becomes one and the same. Worth keeping in mind that all of these points are orthogonal to the quality of reasoning, the bias, or the intentions of the system builders. And building something that emulates humans convincingly,…

In split brain experiments (where the corpus callosum is cut), sometimes the half which is nonverbal is prompted and the action is taken. Yet when the experimenter asks for the explanation the verbal half supplies an (incorrect) explanation. How much of human reasoning when prompted occurs before the prompt? it's a question you have to ask as well.

Re: Is my toddler a stochastic parrot?

#190

Post by jimmygrapes »

esafak wrote: post #118
brainbag wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had heard about this before my son was born. We didn't try to teach him anything, anytime we remembered (which was sporadic) we just used the gestures when talking to him. I was amazed at how quickly he picked up on it, and he was able to communicate his needs to us months before he was able to verbalize. It took very minimal effort on our part, and was very rewarding for him; certainly a lot better than him crying…

In other words, you can invent your own sign language because your child won't need to use it with other people.

plus you can use it as a battle language for your clan
Post reply on HN