@MarioNawfal The real question here is what should be the consequence when this kind of stuff happens. If a human being does that there’s consequences if a robot does that what’s the consequence? Who pays it? If the robot can’t learn from its consequences shouldn’t be around people.
Ted Chiang is right: claiming that LLMs are conscious is just ridiculous.
One simple example. If you ask GPT to imitate a conversation between Julius Caesar and Genghis Khan, GPT will do it very well.
It will talk about wars, betrayal, and power. Il will descrive the feeling of being cheated by your brother with unbelievably realistic and moving words.
Does this mean that GPT contains a self-conscious copy of Julius Caesar or Genghis Khan? Of course not.
Similarly, if GPT makes claims about itself, does this mean it is self-conscious? Of course not.
An LLM is just simulating language, feeling, and consciousness.
True, we don’t have an accepted definition of consciousness. But, at a minimum, to be conscious, an entity must have something at stake.
It must risk dying and have emotions that move it away from danger and towards favorable states. It must have a driver.
This is also why I share Chiang’s worry about moral atrophy.
The more we offload moral decisions to LLMs, the more we risk losing our own capacity for moral reasoning.
Human moral reasoning descends from our history of making harmful actions, suffering harmful actions, regretting them, fearing them, repairing them, and learning from them.
LLMs do not experience harm, do not suffer, do not fear consequences, do not regret.
So they cannot do moral reasoning.
We are offloading moral reasoning to systems that cannot do moral reasoning.
What can go wrong?
*
Full piece in the first reply
@Steve_Dolinsky@BoringBiz_@grok That’s because for the majority of human history, labor wasn’t optional, it was compulsory. Enforced by various forms of tyranny.
Only in the last few centuries has tyranny given way to freedom, resulting in a free market where labor rewards the worker.
When I was a kid in dreamt of an AI with a personality with a moral core, like Max Headroom or Data from Star Trek.
We live in the nightmare of AI not having a moral core and suffering from multiple personality disorder.
If you’re 1 in 1,000 contractors doing technical consulting at the rigor + speed level I am — documented decisions, defensible estimates, audit trail on every dollar of work, operational discipline most agencies haven’t built yet — and you’re charging solo rates for it, raise your hand. I’m doing it. Most aren’t.
The Pope didn’t say anything that top AI researchers aren’t saying.
You are pretending that any use of AI is good, that there is no unhealthy or unsafe way to use AI.
All the Pope did was address the most common and fundamental misuses of AI directly, which is exactly what all of the providers of AI told him.
Ignore them at your own folly.
He is not wrong. You are.
@BDoma@WhiteHouse@ShanDScott This loses the midterms and subsequently cripples the administration for the rest of his term.
Democrats couldn’t defeat him. He’s always been Teflon.
His own worst enemy.
@venturetwins This is all just soft pushback warnings for reaching context limits. You can tell it to not be so obtuse and be direct about that and this stops happening. Then it just tells you to /compact.