Unfortunately, the hype about LLMs has generated breathless ruminations on AGI and consciousness. Dig a little deeper and there doesn't seem to be much there, as one may find that these terms are not adequately defined.
Here we see this attempt:
> First, a disclaimer. Consciousness is a notoriously slippery term, if nonetheless possessed of a certain common-sense quality. In some ways, being conscious just means being aware — aware of ourselves, of others, of the world beyond — in a manner that creates a subject apart, a self or “I,” that can observe.
Which is followed by paragraphs correctly calling out the inadequacy of the above definition. Nowhere though does the reader get a satisfactory answer: what really is consciousness?
One might say who cares if they don't define it? Well, if you don't define it, there's no point in discussing whether it exists, how it came to be, or what it comprises.
You might as well be asking the question: how close are we to quidlesmoopy?
Here we see this attempt:
> First, a disclaimer. Consciousness is a notoriously slippery term, if nonetheless possessed of a certain common-sense quality. In some ways, being conscious just means being aware — aware of ourselves, of others, of the world beyond — in a manner that creates a subject apart, a self or “I,” that can observe.
Which is followed by paragraphs correctly calling out the inadequacy of the above definition. Nowhere though does the reader get a satisfactory answer: what really is consciousness?
One might say who cares if they don't define it? Well, if you don't define it, there's no point in discussing whether it exists, how it came to be, or what it comprises.
You might as well be asking the question: how close are we to quidlesmoopy?