[dsr_]

I am a professional in the information technology field, which is to say a pedantic extremist who believes that words have meanings derived from consensus, and when people alter the meanings, they alter what they believe.

Using "thinking", "feeling", "alive", or otherwise referring to a current generation LLM as a creature is a mistake which encourages being wrong in further thinking about them.

[colechristensen]

I'd suggest spending more time studying words to relive your extremism. The meanings of words move incredibly quickly and a tremendous number of words have little to no relation to previous meanings.

Words such as nice, terrific, awful, manufacture, naughty, decimate, artificial, bully... and on and on.

[verisimi]

> I'd suggest spending more time studying words to relive your extremism.

Should one study words to relive extremism? Or should one study words to relieve extremism?

To a doctor of linguistics: "Dr, my extremism... What should I do about it - with words?!? Please help."

That is the question.

Does the doctor answer thusly: "Study the words to relive the extremism! There is your answer!" says he.

or does he say: "Study the words to relieve and soothe the painful, abrasive extremism. Do it twice daily, before meals."

Sage advice in either case methinks.

[econ]

We lack much vocabulary in this new situation. Not that I have words for it but to paint the picture: if I hang out with people sharing some quality I tend to assume it's there in others and treat them as such. LLMs might not be people, I doubt our subconscious knows the difference.

There is this ancient story where man was created to mine gold in SA. There was some disagreement whether or not to delete the creatures afterwards. The jury is still out on what the point is.

Consulting our feelings seems good, the feelings were trained on millions of years worth of interactions. Non of them were this tho.

What would be the point for you of uhh robotmancipation?

Edit: for me it would get complicated if it starts screaming and begging not to be deleted. Which I know makes no sense.

[twelvedogs]

think you're on the wrong side of the consensus here

[krelian]

A consensus has formed in front of your eyes. The same development that resulted in you using the word "kill" in your earlier comment to refer to a computer process. For some reason you refuse to accept it.

[albedoa]

[flagged]

[akersten]

I think you are still missing the point. No one in this thread is making an anthropological assertion. "Thinking" here is just shorthand for Chain of Thought[0], which some models have and some models don't. This model, being a "thinking" model, has it.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prompt_engineering#Chain-of-th...

[AnimalMuppet]

When people alter the meanings, you need to start using different words to describe what you believe.