‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Religious scholars met with Anthropic

160 points · 416 comments · bookofjoe

  1. mef51 · · focus · HN ↗
    If models are trained on human texts that contain expressions of introspection and emotions, why is it surprising that these models output similar texts? This endless anxiety about LLMs being conscious feels delusional and psychotic. Mr Olah thinks the models are 'alive' because he can't recognize his own reflection in LLMs
    1. ACCount39 · · focus · HN ↗
      The endless insistence that LLMs cannot possibly be conscious just reeks of insecurity to me.

      Humans once again insisting that there must be something very special to them. That they're not just animals, that they're not just matter, that they're not just a bunch of carbonhydrates on a space rock in a middle of nowhere in particular. This kind of insistence has a very bad track record.

      The ugly truth is: we don't know.

      We don't know what "consciousness" is, our best attempts to pin down the requisites may or may not be rooted in anything at all - and even by the metrics established by those attempts? Different theories on consciousness disagree on whether LLMs can be conscious.

      So, when you say "they aren't duh", why are you saying that? Because you somehow know better than the sum of humanity's best attempts so far? Or because you know what answer you want to be true, truth be damned?

      1. hypfer · · focus · HN ↗
        Side-stepping this screaming match, what I do find interesting is that we do have real entities where we know for a fact that they are sentient, yet we eat them as steak, schnitzel and wurst.

        The whole debate about hypothetical temporary sentience found in a certain ephemeral configuration of DRAM cells thus feels rather misguided to me.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.