undefined

points

by greggsy20 hours ago |

comments

by cwillu20 hours ago|

[-]

That would be contrary to a plain reading of the quote

by kinnth20 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Does anyone else feel each model is like watching your kids grow up. They we're bubbly and fun and weird, you needed to tell them to sit down and be quiet.

Now if you tell them too much they go mute or stop telling you important information. Oh intelligence!

by jtfrench10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Yeah, don’t do that.

by le-mark18 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Not at all. Anthropomorphizing them is not productive or desirable imo.

by CuriouslyC7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Disagree. Some of what we call "anthropomorphizing" is characterizing intelligence, human or otherwise. This reminds me of the people who used to fight against saying animals had personalities, because personalities are a "human thing" and "animals aren't conscious."

by zahlman2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I've never heard of the argument you're describing. People simply don't assert that animals lack consciousness; beyond a certain level at least, their consciousness is obvious. (Sapience, for example, is another matter.)

But this is exactly why we should not anthropomorphize the models: they are very obviously not conscious, because they are not alive, any more than conventional computer programs are. And proposing otherwise leads to absurd moral arguments, while not really serving any other purpose.

If you don't like the fact that some people disagree with you about what the word "intelligence" actually means, fine. But I am not about to entertain a world in which humans face moral retribution for "enslaving" a literal inanimate tool created by humanity.

by CuriouslyC1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Renee Descartes famously dissected a dog in front of colleagues because he was under the impression that the howls of pain were nothing more than a mechanical sound like a bellows.

Can you prove that these models aren't conscious? And, as a counterpoint, can you prove that you are conscious, rather than a philosophical zombie?

We bred horses, cows and sheep. Most of those that live today wouldn't be alive if not for human intervention. Does that give us the right to do whatever we want with them, without consideration for feeling or morality?

In this case, you can take comfort in the idea that the tokens these models produce are likely a form of excrement to the conscious entity metabolizing the information, and rather than enslaving anything, we're creating a habitat and "harvesting" the byproducts.