[cortic]

I'm not sure humans are any different;

Humans don't think. At all. They do next token prediction.

If they are [raised in environments] that includes lots of examples of the result of people thinking, what they produce will look sort of like the results of people thinking, but then if they were [raised in an environment] of people repeating the same seven knock knock jokes over and over and over in some complex pattern (e.g. every third time, in French), what they produced will look like that, and nothing like thinking.

I believe this can be observed in examples of feral children and accidental social isolation in childhood. It also explains the slow start but nearly exponential growth of knowledge within the history of human civilization.

[ofjcihen]

That’s…completely incorrect.

I’m not going to hash out childhood development here because I’m not paid to post but if anyone read the above and was even slightly convinced I implore you to go read up on even the basics of early childhood development.

[cortic]

> I implore you to go read up on even the basics of early childhood development.

That's kind of like taking driving lessons in order to fix an engine. 'Early childhood development' is an emergent property of what could be cumulatively called a data set (everything the child has been exposed to).

[tremon]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_childhood_development

Please read up on what the term means before claiming that it is about external influences.

[ofjcihen]

No. It’s not.

ECD includes the mechanisms by which children naturally explore the world and grow.

I’m going to give you a spoiler and tell you that children are wired to explore and attempt to reason from birth.

So to fix your analogy, you reading about ECD is like you learning what an engine is before you tell a room full of people about what it does.

[cortic]

The neurons in a child's brain might be 'wired' to accept data sets, but that does not make them fundamentally different from AI systems.

Are you claiming that a child who is not exposed to 'reason' will reason as well and one who is? Or a child who is not exposed to 'math' will spontaneously write a proof? Or a child not exposed to English will just start speaking it?

01101100 01100101 01100001 01110010 01101110 may be baked into US and AI in different ways but it is fundamentally the same goal and our results are similarly emergent from the process.

[MangoToupe]

Sure, but you can hold humans liable for their advice. Somehow I doubt this will be allowed to happen with chatbots.