I am hopeful for a deterministic theory of the mind rather than the probabilistic inference in LLMs.
Then execute it as a program.
The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
41–50 of 82 posts
Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#42I am hopeful for a deterministic theory of the mind rather than the probabilistic inference in LLMs. Then execute it as a program.
It may very well turn out that probabilistic approximation would be 1000000x cheaper to compute than the deterministic precise theory.
Or even better, even formulating the deterministic theory would require 1000000x energy than approximation. And that's how'd we learn that biological minds do the same trick and skip the hard work :-)
Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#43I am hopeful for a deterministic theory of the mind rather than the probabilistic inference in LLMs. Then execute it as a program.
It may very well turn out that probabilistic approximation would be 1000000x cheaper to compute than the deterministic precise theory. Or even better, even formulating the deterministic theory would require 1000000x energy than approximation. And that's how'd we learn that biological minds do the same trick and skip the hard work :-)
Or it may very well turn out to just be a next key lookup which is 100000x cheaper to compute than probabilistic inference.
The vast amounts of energy spends on generating text tokens while biology only consumes a fraction of it makes me hopeful.
My bet is on the deterministic model. When one appears, the whole Jenga tower of AI comes crashing down if everyone can do it dirt cheap.
Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may very well turn out that probabilistic approximation would be 1000000x cheaper to compute than the deterministic precise theory. Or even better, even formulating the deterministic theory would require 1000000x energy than approximation. And that's how'd we learn that biological minds do the same trick and skip the hard work :-)
Or it may very well turn out to just be a next key lookup which is 100000x cheaper to compute than probabilistic inference. The vast amounts of energy spends on generating text tokens while biology only consumes a fraction of it makes me hopeful. My bet is on the deterministic model. When one appears, the whole Jenga tower of AI comes crashing down if everyone can do it dirt cheap.
"god does not play dice" was proven wrong a while ago ...
Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or it may very well turn out to just be a next key lookup which is 100000x cheaper to compute than probabilistic inference. The vast amounts of energy spends on generating text tokens while biology only consumes a fraction of it makes me hopeful. My bet is on the deterministic model. When one appears, the whole Jenga tower of AI comes crashing down if everyone can do it dirt cheap.
"god does not play dice" was proven wrong a while ago ...
Conflating biological mind with quantum mechanics is a category error.
Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or it may very well turn out to just be a next key lookup which is 100000x cheaper to compute than probabilistic inference. The vast amounts of energy spends on generating text tokens while biology only consumes a fraction of it makes me hopeful. My bet is on the deterministic model. When one appears, the whole Jenga tower of AI comes crashing down if everyone can do it dirt cheap.
"god does not play dice" was proven wrong a while ago ...
I stand corrected
Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or it may very well turn out to just be a next key lookup which is 100000x cheaper to compute than probabilistic inference. The vast amounts of energy spends on generating text tokens while biology only consumes a fraction of it makes me hopeful. My bet is on the deterministic model. When one appears, the whole Jenga tower of AI comes crashing down if everyone can do it dirt cheap.
"god does not play dice" was proven wrong a while ago ...
* in so far as QM is natural, we evolved in its presence and so its probable that we are deeply integrated
Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#48Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#49I believe machines could be made that think. But not purely digital ones. The brain most certainly isn’t a thinking machine precisely because it doesn’t have the luxury of unlimited time. Its design is not based on executing best algorithms, but rather finding good enough solutions among many time constrained but interlinked signal cascades. The brain and body instead construct time, a cohesive internal one,from the…
>Its design is not based on executing best algorithms, but rather finding good enough solutions among many time constrained but interlinked signal cascades.
That's known as optimization algorithm, and genetic algorithm is known to produce good enough results fast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_antenna Computers are time constrained too and cut such corners just like humans.
> They do not experience time. They can check the clock.
Humans experience time because they check biological clock. And sometimes humans forget about time just fine, when they don't check the clock.
Re: The Computational Theory of Mind (2015)
#50My thinking, tangential to the temporal section, is an Implementation Trilemma, a CAP style theorem. An implementation map can be: 1. instantaneous and faithful, at the cost of depending upon substrate-specific persistence parameters; 2. faithful and substrate-neutral, at the cost of requiring historical information; 3. instantaneous and substrate-neutral, at the cost of losing faithfulness. No implementation map can…
To anyone who has ever built, designed or debugged physical hardware, the paper's "groundbreaking conclusion" is a mundane reality of physics that a state isn't practically a state unless it lasts long enough to be read.