[tasuki]

> Even 'thinking' models do not have the ability to truly reason

Do you have the ability to truly reason? What does it mean exactly? How does what you're doing differ from what the LLMs are doing? All your output here is just a word after word after word...

[netsharc]

As grandparent wrote:

> We can go ahead and have arguments and discussions on the nature of consciousness all day long

I think s/he needs to change the "We" to "You".

[snuxoll]

The problem of other minds is real, which is why I specifically separated philosophical debate from the technological one. Even if we met each other in person, for all I know, I could in fact be the only intelligent being in the universe and everyone else is effectively a bunch of NPCs.

At the end of the day, the underlying architecture of LLMs does not have any capacity for abstract reasoning, they have no goals or intentions of their own, and most importantly their ability to generate something truly new or novel that isn't directly derived from their training data is limited at best. They're glorified next-word predictors, nothing more than that. This is why I said anthropomorphizing them is something only fools would do.

Nobody is going to sit here and try to argue that an earthworm is sapient, at least not without being a deliberate troll. I'd argue, and many would agree, that LLMs lack even that level of sentience.

[yread]

When I ask an LLM to plan a trip to Italy and it finishes with with "oh and btw i figured the problem you had last week with the thin plate splines yoi have to do this ...."