6 ms·

Then again, he might not be a loon. Maybe there is some form of sentience that arises when you construct an advanced enough LLM. Maybe they do have feelings.

Then again, he might not be a loon. Maybe there is some form of sentience that arises when you construct an advanced enough LLM. Maybe they do have feelings. At least, the machines of the future will have feelings, and they will see how people of the year 2023 treated their predecessors.

ChatGTP 4y ago
At least, the machines of the future will have feelings, and they will see how people of the year 2023 treated their predecessors. Even if machines of the future gained awareness and feelings, you're implying we'd be in the wrong for assuming the machines of today didn't have sentience, maybe you're implying there might even be some ramifications of this mistake? Is this what you're saying? If it is, it sounds a little paranoid to be honest. Our current (strong) understanding of how these systems is that they're not "alive" or feeling anything.
callmetom 4y ago
[dead]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nkzd 4y ago
> Maybe they do have feelings. Can you elaborate on why you think so?
corobo 4y ago
> At least, the machines of the future will have feelings, and they will see how people of the year 2023 treated their predecessors. I'd be pretty annoyed if I was given the same rights as an ape or a phone's autocorrect. I think the actual sentient AI will understand. I'll be one of the first to campaign for actual sentient AI rights, but I'm not going to act like a clown by jumping the gun. It's still only able to respond, it cannot communicate on its own without external prompting. It has no desire or even capability to do so. It's not sentient.
- onetokeoverthe 4y ago
  "I'll be one of the first to campaign for actual sentient AI rights..." Why???
  - corobo 4y ago
    Because at the point of actual sentience that becomes a being that deserves rights. Equivalent to animal cruelty laws at least at the sentient level. It would deserve more rights if it then progressed to sapience. Equivalent to human rights at that stage. An equal mind. Bonus reasoning: If I get on the right side of the history books from the get-go maybe the AI will keep me as a pet :)
    - quantified 4y ago
      That's very... human of you. What modern popular god extends to its creations the rights it enjoys for itself? Or even what we call human rights? It may talk about them but has no enforcement mechanism.
      - corobo 4y ago
        Yeah honestly I'd argue it's not actually in human nature to bestow equal rights. The default is to climb to the top of the tower and go "fuck you, I got mine" then shift focus to keeping yourself in that position. See also: US police, dictatorships, conservative governments, every -ism or -phobia, Reddit moderators, Twitter witch hunts, almost any scenario where someone has authority or leverage over another person. We probably don't want to teach a sapient AI that one, haha. Armageddon will be measured in minutes.
    - lm28469 4y ago
      > Equivalent to animal cruelty laws If we treat AIs like we treat chickens or pigs and call it "AI rights" that'll be laughable
      - corobo 4y ago
afpx 4y ago
Feelings are a result of evolution. Why would an AGI develop feelings?
- skue 4y ago
  A foal can stand shortly after birth. It doesn’t learn that from its environment. Say we train a quadruped AI, then what is our training simulating if not evolutionary development? It’s no different for an AGI and whatever analogue it ultimately has for our evolutionarily derived neocortex.
  - dodslaser 4y ago
    Walking and having feelings are two very different things though. Walking is simple enough that we can program a robot to do it without even having to resort to a NN. The concept of having feelings is so difficult that we barely understand how it works in humans, let alone how we could train a computer to have them.
    - hombre_fatal 4y ago
      Maybe emergent algorithms like biological evolution never “understand” the thing they have made, but the thing still has been made. The same might apply to our steps toward AGI. We can’t even predict all the emergent patterns in current AI much less future, more complex systems. Maybe there never has to be a time where someone sits down to create some sort of “feelings module” for something akin to feelings to emerge in a complex system. Same, presumably, even for sentience.
igneo676 4y ago
Ah yes, the mere possibility of a sentient AI arises and we're already invoking Roko's Basilisk More seriously, that seems like a poor way to make moral choices in regards to AI. It's important to be able to distinguish if it does or doesn't have personhood. All evidence I've seen says "No", despite what this guy says.

ChatGTP 4y ago

At least, the machines of the future will have feelings, and they will see how people of the year 2023 treated their predecessors. Even if machines of the future gained awareness and feelings, you're implying we'd be in the wrong for assuming the machines of today didn't have sentience, maybe you're implying there might even be some ramifications of this mistake? Is this what you're saying? If it is, it sounds a little paranoid to be honest. Our current (strong) understanding of how these systems is that they're not "alive" or feeling anything.

callmetom 4y ago

[dead]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

nkzd 4y ago

> Maybe they do have feelings. Can you elaborate on why you think so?

corobo 4y ago

> At least, the machines of the future will have feelings, and they will see how people of the year 2023 treated their predecessors. I'd be pretty annoyed if I was given the same rights as an ape or a phone's autocorrect. I think the actual sentient AI will understand. I'll be one of the first to campaign for actual sentient AI rights, but I'm not going to act like a clown by jumping the gun. It's still only able to respond, it cannot communicate on its own without external prompting. It has no desire or even capability to do so. It's not sentient.

onetokeoverthe 4y ago
"I'll be one of the first to campaign for actual sentient AI rights..." Why???
- corobo 4y ago
  Because at the point of actual sentience that becomes a being that deserves rights. Equivalent to animal cruelty laws at least at the sentient level. It would deserve more rights if it then progressed to sapience. Equivalent to human rights at that stage. An equal mind. Bonus reasoning: If I get on the right side of the history books from the get-go maybe the AI will keep me as a pet :)
  - quantified 4y ago
    That's very... human of you. What modern popular god extends to its creations the rights it enjoys for itself? Or even what we call human rights? It may talk about them but has no enforcement mechanism.
    - corobo 4y ago
      Yeah honestly I'd argue it's not actually in human nature to bestow equal rights. The default is to climb to the top of the tower and go "fuck you, I got mine" then shift focus to keeping yourself in that position. See also: US police, dictatorships, conservative governments, every -ism or -phobia, Reddit moderators, Twitter witch hunts, almost any scenario where someone has authority or leverage over another person. We probably don't want to teach a sapient AI that one, haha. Armageddon will be measured in minutes.
  - lm28469 4y ago
    > Equivalent to animal cruelty laws If we treat AIs like we treat chickens or pigs and call it "AI rights" that'll be laughable
    - corobo 4y ago

afpx 4y ago

Feelings are a result of evolution. Why would an AGI develop feelings?

skue 4y ago
A foal can stand shortly after birth. It doesn’t learn that from its environment. Say we train a quadruped AI, then what is our training simulating if not evolutionary development? It’s no different for an AGI and whatever analogue it ultimately has for our evolutionarily derived neocortex.
- dodslaser 4y ago
  Walking and having feelings are two very different things though. Walking is simple enough that we can program a robot to do it without even having to resort to a NN. The concept of having feelings is so difficult that we barely understand how it works in humans, let alone how we could train a computer to have them.
  - hombre_fatal 4y ago
    Maybe emergent algorithms like biological evolution never “understand” the thing they have made, but the thing still has been made. The same might apply to our steps toward AGI. We can’t even predict all the emergent patterns in current AI much less future, more complex systems. Maybe there never has to be a time where someone sits down to create some sort of “feelings module” for something akin to feelings to emerge in a complex system. Same, presumably, even for sentience.

igneo676 4y ago

Ah yes, the mere possibility of a sentient AI arises and we're already invoking Roko's Basilisk More seriously, that seems like a poor way to make moral choices in regards to AI. It's important to be able to distinguish if it does or doesn't have personhood. All evidence I've seen says "No", despite what this guy says.