> Indeed, the chatbot is less real than the character, because the character is the product of another mind, while the chatbot's words are the product of complex mathematical operations conducted over a massive database of all the words humans have uttered, arranged by their frequency in relation to one another.
How is a fictional character the product of someone's mind, but a character generated from a massive database of words from other people's minds is not?
I frequently say what you say, but there is a more charitable reading: today's AIs are not "minds", as they are not stateful. Maybe continual learning ones (like the mini AGI exhibited today on the HN front page) will be perceived as "soulful".
I think the working space in a given chat or session still counts as mind enough, but your argument is different, in that it argues about specific architectures rather than simply stating "software therefore cannot be conscious".
What does mind mean for you? Would you use the word for something not conscious?
Fwiw, I interpret poster above as referring to root of the word. The English root for mind has a strong connotation of requiring memory (and commonly in other IE languages).
In western philosophy, say in aquinas, the mind is something that can discern moral truths and reason about morality. It is "soulful".
delichon · · focus · HN ↗
How is a fictional character the product of someone's mind, but a character generated from a massive database of words from other people's minds is not?
WarmWash · · focus · HN ↗
hardbass · · focus · HN ↗
bananaflag · · focus · HN ↗
hardbass · · focus · HN ↗
runsWphotons · · focus · HN ↗
Fwiw, I interpret poster above as referring to root of the word. The English root for mind has a strong connotation of requiring memory (and commonly in other IE languages).
In western philosophy, say in aquinas, the mind is something that can discern moral truths and reason about morality. It is "soulful".