[koe123]

Probably being super naive, but stuff like that always makes me wonder, is there something special about human consciousness, even? Perhaps it's just a sliding scale and we're just seemingly ahead of other specifies. We assert that consciousness exists and distinguishes us, but is that really the case?

[mptest]

David chalmers doesn't think llm's are conscious yet but also doesn't think there's any real barriers for silicon to get to human consciousness[0]

[0]https://youtu.be/j6cCXg-rjRo

He gives a few of the biggest reasons they're not conscious, and gives his thoughts on them as long term barriers.

1. biology necessary for life? He doesn't buy it

2. sensors/body - no embodiment akin to philosophers brain in a vat at best. "no agentive consciousness" he also doesn't buy this one, a it's solvable, b the brain in a vat might still have some limited form of consciousness

3.world models : stochastic parrot argument - he doesn't buy this either as being a valid "llm's will never be conscious" reason. he even thinks current llm's did have some world model if not a "full" one"

4. feed forward systems - stateless - lack long term memory Recurrent processing necessary? "Not all consciousness involves memory"

5. Unified agency - they're chameleons, actors, - are stable goals/unity necessary for consciousness? a "fixed" identity?

from a quick scroll thru of the vid

[ganzuul]

If you presuppose that consciousness follows intelligence you end up in a philosophy that you rewrite endlessly. If you suppose the inverse relationship where consciousness is pre-existent and an intelligence becomes self-aware as a result then you instead embark on a spiritual quest.

The mind has the interesting property that as it cuts itself into pieces it hones itself sharper and sharper. This however is a painful way of life where joy and innocence are sacrificed for power and control.