this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
51 points (100.0% liked)

SneerClub

989 readers
2 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Then: Google fired Blake Lemoine for saying AIs are sentient

Now: Geoffrey Hinton, the #1 most cited AI scientist, quits Google & says AIs are sentient

That makes 2 of the 3 most cited scientists:

  • Ilya Sutskever (#3) said they may be (Andrej Karpathy agreed)
  • Yoshua Bengio (#2) has not opined on this to my knowledge? Anyone know?

Also, ALL 3 of the most cited AI scientists are very concerned about AI extinction risk.

ALL 3 switched from working on AI capabilities to AI safety.

Anyone who still dismisses this as “silly sci-fi” is insulting the most eminent scientists of this field.

Anyway, brace yourselves… the Overton Window on AI sentience/consciousness/self-awareness is about to blow open>

all 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 47 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It's true. ChatGPT is slightly sentient in the same way a field of wheat is slightly pasta.

[–] Ashtefere@aussie.zone 20 points 7 months ago (1 children)

As someone who learned about Ai in uni and now works in Ai, this shit is straight up bullshit and its infuriating.

The most obvious thing about this being all bullshit is that the LLM's don't have their own idle emergent "thought" - they are purely reactive, so not sentient. Case closed for fucks sake.

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 17 points 7 months ago (1 children)
  • Barges in
  • Insists that somewhere between randomly initializing the model weights and finishing training, sentience magically emerges
  • Refuses to elaborate
  • Leaves Google

[–] froztbyte@awful.systems 12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Ah but we all know that plato’s cave is an allegory about the shadows cast by the basilisk upon all our mental theaters

(That twitter clip was amazingly unhinged, I wonder what the full context was)

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 7 points 7 months ago

Like a model trained on its own outputs, Geoff has drank his own Kool-Aid and completely decohered.

[–] zogwarg@awful.systems 7 points 7 months ago

And those shadows are just as sentient as we are, even if they don't depict the world, they convey a perception of a hypothetical world in which they are accurate!

Trying to grapple with the meaning consciousness through input/output is so close to being philosophical zombies type interesting, and yet so far and vacuous in what he actually says, that could apply to dice picking which color the sky is today. Also pretty hilarious that we would choose being WRONG, as a baseline (because LLM's are so bad) for outrospection, instead using the more natural cooperative nature of language. (Which machines fail at, which is maybe also why)

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 15 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The field of wheat is also slightly sentient.

[–] Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems 20 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Honestly, I reckon a field of wheat would be more sentient than a chatbot. It can sense its environment and it doesn't even need a prompt to do its thing.

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 9 points 7 months ago

ngl, I'd sooner believe slime mold had mental states than a sequence of matrix multiplications & ReLUs.

[–] sc_griffith@awful.systems 24 points 7 months ago

"quits google saying ai is sentient" has big "quitting the new york times and saying you're cancelled" vibes

[–] mii@awful.systems 22 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Ilya Sutskever also sings AGI chants in the lab and continues to suck major VC dick together with Altman to get more of that sweet moolah to keep developing their chatbots.

Even though he’s apparently very concerned about extinction risks.

In other news, please give me money so I can build a nuke in my basement, which might be powerful enough to blow up the planet, and I’m very concerned it will, trust me, I totally am, but don’t forget to give me money because otherwise I can’t build that nuke that I’m very honestly concerned about.

Also that nuke might be slightly sentient if you squint.

[–] titotal@awful.systems 22 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I feel really bad for the person behind the "notkilleveryonism" account. They've been completely taken in by AI doomerism and are clearly terrified by it. They'll either be terrified for their entire life even as the predicted doom fails to appear, or realise at some point that they wasted an entire portion of their life and their entire system of belief is a lie.

False doomerism is really harming people, and that sucks.

Yeah man but it’s sold for thousands of years, and the last hundred? Oh you’d better believe we know it sells

[–] carlitoscohones@awful.systems 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Every scientist I know is always going on and on about how the Overton Window is about to shift on their field of study. This is how serious work gets done, by measuring public opinion.

[–] elmtonic@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Must be a vestigial idea from the crypto hype days. Back then, if the Overton window shifted in your favor, it meant you were about to make a lot of money. With AI the benefits are less clear, but damn it if they're not trying to find them.

Actually tbh this is exactly the kind of person that might go all-in on Nvidia stock so it still might be the money thing.

[–] aStonedSanta@lemm.ee 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think we need to start being more objective similar to common therapy tactics. What feels correct isn’t always correct. Feelings are vested in your brain not in fact.

[–] froztbyte@awful.systems 13 points 7 months ago

I feel this post is unclear