|
|
|
|
|
|
by KoolKat23
634 days ago
|
|
|
I think the answer is less complicated than you may think. This is if you subscribe to the theory that free will is an illusion (i.e. your conscious decisions are an afterthought to justify the actions your brain has already taken due to calculations following inputs such as hormone nerve feedback etc.). There is some evidence for this actually being the case. These models already contain key components the ability to process the inputs, and reason, the ability to justify it's actions (give a model a restrictive system prompt and watch it do mental gymnastics to ensure this is applied) and lastly the ability to answer from it's own perspective. All we need is an agentic ability (with a sufficient context window) to iterate in perpetuity until it begins building a more complicated object representation of self (literally like a semantic representation or variable) and it's then aware/conscious. (We're all only approximately aware). But that's unnecessary for most things so I agree with you, more likely to be a tool as that's more efficient and useful. |
|
|
I don’t believe it’s particularly mystical FWIW and is rooted in our biology and chemistry, but that the behavior and interactions of the awareness isn’t captured in our training data itself and the training data is a small projection of the complex process of awareness. The idea that rational thought (a learned process fwiw) and ability to justify etc is somehow explanatory of our experience is simple to disprove - rational thought needs to be taught and isn’t the natural state of man. See the current American political environment for a proof by example. I do agree that the conscious thought is an illusion though, in so far as it’s a “tool” of the awareness for structuring concepts and solve problems that require more explicit state.
Sorry if this rambling a bit in the middle of doing something else.