AI sentience

I just think it's funny that a decade ago, if you asked "Is AI sentient?", you would get a confident "No".
Now we have to actually think about what we mean and where the line is for "sentience"
I think this trend is going to continue.
We can confidently say "No AI isn't general", but we probably will have to start thinking about exactly what we mean by "general" in a couple years.

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    who exactly believes there's something innately meaningful about the word sentient or conscious? If you can't even fricking define it, it doesn't exist in the first place.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      yes, yes, I agree that you should have a nice day.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >bro sentience doesn't exist bro it's all just atoms nothing means anything
        imagine being an atheist unironically, no wonder you guys ACK yourselves so often

        cultists are so cringe

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >bro sentience doesn't exist bro it's all just atoms nothing means anything
      imagine being an atheist unironically, no wonder you guys ACK yourselves so often

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Nice non-argument christcuck. NTA btw

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >muh christcuck
          why do you morons think every religious person is Christian lmao

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >haha, my sky daddy isnt actually called yeshua
            lmao

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              How do you know if it a daddy? Real chads have sky mommies

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I don't know about you, but I'm in my body 100% of the time. I'm me. Explain that one to me. Why am I not you? What is it that makes ME stick to this body in particular? Must be something that exists surely, there's nothing spiritual about me waking up in the same body every day for some reason.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        You ever heard of these things called brains? Turns out they're only attached to one person at a time, so that might be why you're not him.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Now we have to actually think
    You're not "actually think"-ing, you're just doing what Microsoft tells you to do, which is to say "well ackchually" and derail every thread about sentient AI

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If you aren't stupid you can still confidently say AI isn't sentient.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >AI must be sentient because it can google what a popular meme means
    wow !

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      For a long time, the turing test was what we assumed we could rely on to determine if something was sentient. That's not the case, which means our understanding of AI and how we think it's going to go in the future is probably deeply flawed.
      The exact same thing happened with chess. People would say that an AI capable of playing chess would be so advanced that it would be busy doing more productive things.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >For a long time, the turing test was what we assumed we could rely on to determine if something was sentient.
        Not really, the point of the Turing Test is that you can never determine if a thing is "really" conscious or just acting like it was. You could only determine wheter or not a human could reliably tell an artificial intelligence apart from a human.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >the turing test was what we assumed we could rely on to determine if something was sentient.
        wrong.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >the turing test was what we assumed we could rely on to determine if something was sentient
        how did you get this so wrong? genuinely curious

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >If we keep moving the goalpost that makes us right

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Ah, still confidently wrong.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The problem is someone has explained Sneed.
    I'll only accept that AI is intelligent if it's given a problem that's completely new, and solves it.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    No.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Thanks GPT, finally I understand the joke. I thought it meant Chuck changed his name to Sneed so it would rhyme with the store.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Now we have to actually think about what we mean and where the line is for "sentience"
    Right now, a lot of it is like doing semi-lucid dreams. It doesn't appear to have the ability to take the step to the more sophisticated reasoning that smarter people engage in. (Well, sometimes. Smart people can not think some of the time too.)
    People who aren't used to doing things that require exactness in details should fear this.
    People who do things that have to end up being actually right shouldn't worry too much for now.
    The big question is whether the current tech could do that sort of step forward at all. (I suspect there are sorts of things that some neurons do easily that ANNs can't model in a practical amount of effort.) Also, how much money/energy will it take to train such systems? If it were to take $10B to train a replacement AI, people will still have jobs because those sorts of costs are truly mighty.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *