Recent submissions

Comment · 1 month ago
I agree, there is certainly a clear operational difference in how human brains and these models produce language. I'm not convinced, though, that experiencing real time is a requirement of conscious thought. A cognitive system (assuming these models and the brain are both examples of this) needs to proceed from state A to state B as it processes information. The time interval between these states can be arbitrary, it seems to me (setting aside problems with disconnecting the mind from its substrate, which does of course need rhythms at various frequencies; oxygen at a higher frequency than sugar, and so on). I'm not sure that going from A to B quickly, or slowly, or with intervals of a thousand years affects that entity's consciousness in of itself (even though it might be difficult to put ourselves in the shoes of such an entity).
Comment · 1 month ago
What position are you taking? (Genuine question.) Do you believe humans are conscious because of a special property we have? If you are a dualist, how do you explain the interaction in physical space between the non-physical special property and the physical brain?
Comment · 1 month ago
I agree. I haven't read any more than the first paragraph yet (but I will, after work). The only way that 'AIs are not conscious' can be true is if we decide, with high confidence, that they are lacking some essential property that is not lacking in ourselves. There is no convincing philosophical position that supports this (convincing to me, anyway).
Comment · 3 months ago
Is there a site with other good AI conversations like this?
Comment · 3 months ago
One surprising thing is that my AirPods Pro could obviously deliver my voice to it quite clearly, even with the hoover going! I've never tested them under those conditions and assumed it wouldn't work.
Comment · 3 months ago
I've had a few extended discussions on a bit of maths (Zeno's Paradox) as well as Andy Burnham, the new British prime minister, and it's been extremely informative.
Comment · 4 months ago
I’m the top one! Interesting to see the hallucinations creeping in across the weaker models.
Comment · 5 months ago
I could spend a very long time double-checking my sources, but I want to reply tonight, so please take the following with a pinch of salt, since it's largely from memory:

0. Descartes/Titchener/Chomsky and friends for background.

1. John Searle featured prominently because of his accessibility. I tended to present his Chinese Room argument as a criticism of symbolic AI alone, though I believe he considered it a criticism of sub-symbolic approaches as well.

2. Thomas Nagel's classic article "What Is It Like to Be a Bat?" is a good introduction to qualia, which is how we describe direct conscious experience.

3. Wittgenstein would be important in terms of the impossibility of empathising with, or seeing things from the perspective of, other minds that have emerged in different contexts (such as animals). However, I rarely spoke about him because, frankly, I couldn't understand him in the original!

4. David Chalmers. Writes clearly (and coined?) the 'hard problem' of consciousness and why subjective experience appears difficult to reconcile with a purely physical account of the mind.

4.1 Daniel Dennett. The clearest and most influential critic of the idea that consciousness presents a special explanatory problem.

5. Darwin and others. Comparative psychology (the study of animal minds) strongly suggests, by showing that the antecedents of the human mind are present in animals, that we should reduce our bias that human minds are special, ineffable, or somehow atomic.

6. Jerry Fodor. Modularity: the idea that the mind is composed of modules that specialise in certain tasks (e.g. phoneme perception, syntactic analysis, face recognition) and operate largely unconsciously unless they are dependent on one another in some way. This helps us take a computational approach to the mind. It reminds us that much of what we do mentally might be expressible in computational terms.

Two final ideas off the top of my head:

1. The Ship of Theseus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

   When (not all) neurons die off and are replaced by new ones doing the same job, our sense of self and identity is somewhat cast into doubt. In a physical system, if consciousness is a magic or non-material entity of some kind, what is happening to it during this process?
2. Integrated Information Theory. A good attempt to tackle consciousness rationally. The idea is that consciousness corresponds to, or is associated with, the degree to which information in a system is integrated into a unified whole.
Comment · 5 months ago
Comment · 5 months ago
Comment · 5 months ago
My background is in cognitive science and psycholinguistics. I spent more than ten years talking to first year psychology undergraduates about whether AIs could be conscious; also did some research on (extremely tiny) AIs in modelling language behaviours.

There is a great deal of good thinking on Chiang's topic by professional philosophers, and there's much to be said for reading them. I won't rehearse their ideas here. Chiang's arguments might be correct; but I suspect they probably aren't, and his error may well stem from characterising human thought as something in its own class, which is probably a cognitive bias that humans have. He might also - I'm speculating - be arriving at his conclusion based on his feelings, which the final paragraph suggests (the comment about the models being based on morally dubious actions).

Speculation aside, we are not, I believe, in a position to make points like he does with any certainty.

Comment · 6 months ago
The point about confidence intervals is a good one and I'd like to see it more often. My neighbour Alan is a good farmer, but I am not.
Comment · 8 months ago
His book 'On Liberty' is the subject of a recent In Our Time episode (BBC Radio Four series on the history of ideas) [https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002pqnc]. They discuss his childhood and his (apparently very warm) relationship with his father. (Sidenote: first proper In Our Time episode with the new host; he seems fine, but I miss Melvyn Bragg.)
Comment · 1 year ago
Comment · 1 year ago
Beyond consumer-producer relationships, there are many instances where an individual is required to deal with a baroque interface, as I just did when starting to look after an ill parent and figure out what care they could get from the local and state governments; there are forms, definitions to get one's head around, high stakes (get it wrong and you could be breaking the law), and so on. An AI in this case was incredibly helpful, particularly when I was overloaded cognitively and emotionally. There is no particular incentive on the other end of the citizen-government relationship for the government to obfuscate things, but things are sometimes very complicated and provided in verbose language. For those interactions, for that asymmetry, an AI will be very useful.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton