• Slotos@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s your job to prove your assertion that we know enough about cognition to make reasonable comparisons.

    • Veraticus@lib.lgbtOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      May as well ask me to prove that we know enough about calculators to say they won’t develop sentience while I’m at it.

      • Communist@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Except calculators aren’t models capable of understanding language that appear to become more and more capable as they grow. It’s nothing like that.

        • emptiestplace@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Isn’t it, though? Take two cells and rub them together, do it a bit more, boom here we are on Lemmy.

          We wouldn’t refer to our consciousness as an emergent property of algae.

          • Communist@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, but we would refer to our consciousness as an emergent property of our brain.

            And we’re trying to build artificial brains.

            • emptiestplace@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sorry, I guess what I was trying to say is that it doesn’t take much to get from “calculator” to a system that is Turing complete, and from there we’re just a few sleeps away from LLMs, and from there…