[octobus2021]

I'm so tired of hearing this non-answer as to why the LLM is inferior to the human mind. Well of course it's figuring out what the next word needs to be, what do you think humans are doing when they're speaking???

The funniest thing about all this hoopla about sentient AI is that there's no good way to determine what intelligence is, or sentience, or consciousness, because there's no precise definition for any of these. So one person can call LLM sentient and another non-sentient and both can be right since they'd be going by their own definitions.

One thing is certain, we want to keep this thing as far away from the nuke launch codes as possible cause we kinda already know how this will end. :-(

Edit: some random thoughts added...

[YeGoblynQueenne]

So, we'll go no more a roving

So late into the night,

Though the heart be still as loving,

And the moon be still as bright.

For the sword outwears its sheath,

And the soul wears out the breast,

And the heart must pause to breathe,

And love itself have rest.

Though the night was made for loving,

And the day returns too soon,

Yet we'll go no more a roving

By the light of the moon.

(Byron)

So what do you think I did here? Did I predict the next word? Was that the most likely text continuation of your comment? The least likely? Somewhere in between? Does my response imply that I'm predicting the next token in a sequence, or am I likely to be doing something different?

[kelseyfrog]

Taking a page out of Nagel's What Is It Like To Be A Bat, the inseparable subjective nature of consciousness/qualia/what-is-it-like-ness makes it antithetical to the perspectiveless objective(ness) of science. In other words, the whole point of science is to develop a perspectiveless espistomological framework and the perspective-ness of conscious experience is outside the bounds of science. Consciousness *is" objectiveless.