Even worse, way too many people are still actively supporting this. That can even been seen in the HN commenting crowd
back
1 comments
> the HN commenting crowd
That set also contains elements who will swear that LLMs are conscious, so it does not mean as much as we might want it to.
Fair. Though that’s likely a reflection of the general population
Or at least, the tech-bro subset of the general population. It's possible that they're disproportionately vocal on HN, but I think overall it's a reasonably accurate presentation of that (narrow but powerful) demographic.
I dont support Trump, but the conscious part is closer to me.
Why would you think LLMs are not conscious? Maybe a link to an article that is aligned with your views? That would help me understand your viewpoint.
Are dogs conscious? Maybe not, or a bit so. LLMs are more conscious than dogs.
LLM are deficient in certain memory aspect - particularly a gap between the generation cycle and the context window. So they seem forgetful. But people with memory loss or damaged hypocampus are still conscious. LLMs are dumb in certain aspects, do weird errors, but we still agree that dumb people with weird errors are conscious.
Theory wise thinking is likely substrate independent. Unless you think that biological tissue holds some life force that allows to transend comoutation limitations somehow.
Thats probably not what you wanted to read, Im aorry. Just really curious in how do you reconcile all of this.
Do you think diffusion models or models that generate video and image are conscious? I'd say most people who think LLMs are conscious don't think the same way about non-chattng models ( unless you ask them then they might say "sure" in an attempt to remain consistent).
My point is it's the interaction medium that's causing the confusion and causinf this psychosis that's tricking people into feeling like they're talking to someone.
LLMs are not conscious, sams as google chrome, same as GTA 5, same as your latest python script.