7 ms·

> And therefore, if an AI had more data that mirrors that experience in some way would it be sufficiently creative to create something "truly original"? An imp

> And therefore, if an AI had more data that mirrors that experience in some way would it be sufficiently creative to create something "truly original"? An important distinction seems to lie in a human having original experiences to draw from, while an AI has only "data that mirrors" experiences.

exe34 2mo ago
> while an AI has only "data that mirrors" experiences. True for a lot of current AI. With more robotic bodies, loads more access to cameras/audio/satellite/science measurements, an AI can have original experience on a level that can only be described as god-like compared to humans.
- keiferski 2mo ago
  And at this point you’re far off into science fiction, and beyond reasonable discussion of this. Even then, it’s not really clear to me that an android with the exact appearance of a person will have the same experiences. They aren’t biological creatures with millions of years of evolution behind them.
- kraai 2mo ago
  You could argue AI already partly has access to these measurements. You could easily tap into smart sensor data etc, same voor video/audio etc. The part that AI can't (yet) truly replicate is 'feelings/emotions'. Experiences such feeling dread, loneliness, happiness. Or being anxious, nervous or having goosebumps. You can describe all these states but they are differently experienced for each individual and also dependent on each unique situation. Ofcourse this also then comes down to how you exactly define emotions.
  - exe34 2mo ago
    We don't know that Claude doesn't feel dread when it looks at my code. To be fair, these emotional circuits are the result of evolving in various environments. AI might well have completely new emotions that we just can't comprehend.
- EGG_CREAM 2mo ago
  If it has a subjective viewpoint, i.e. sentience. Otherwise it still doesn’t actually experience any of those things, and can’t tell actually you what it’s like to experience those things. It can give you the data readings though.
  - brazzy 2mo ago
    Wouldn't it be funny if they missing thing is actually the body, and having one to give the subjective viewpoint something to center on directly leads to emerging sentience? Though I think there's at least one more important thing missing, namely the ability to form memories - to incorporate recent context into the model's weights. I don't think it's a coincidence that this is a very complex process in humans as well (involving sleep and dreams as neccessary mechanisms).
rahimnathwani 2mo ago
ChatGPT has had more conversations than you or I have. And it's conversed with people from a wider range of backgrounds in a wider range of situations.
- keiferski 2mo ago
  And? Can you tell me what it feels like to eat a hamburger by asking a thousand people about it?
  - rahimnathwani 2mo ago
    Yes, of course.
    - keiferski 2mo ago
      That’s a pretty lacking theory of knowledge. How can you know what taste is, if you’re never tasted anything? If you read a thousand books about living in New York City, is that the same thing as the experiential knowledge that comes from living there in person? I certainly don’t think so.
      - rahimnathwani 2mo ago
        keiferski didn't ask for a theory of knowledge. You're moving the goalposts.
        keiferski 2mo ago
        That's literally what the conversation is about: what is knowledge? You cannot claim that descriptive knowledge of something is equivalent to experiential knowledge of it, unless you have a theory of knowledge explaining why this is the case.
        rahimnathwani 2mo ago
        You asked for a description: "Can you tell me what it feels like to eat a hamburger" I am sure I Fable (or GPT-5.6-Sol) could answer this question very well. It can probably even tell us what it feels like to eat a hamburger for the first time when you spent the first 18 years of your life as a vegetarian.

exe34 2mo ago

> while an AI has only "data that mirrors" experiences. True for a lot of current AI. With more robotic bodies, loads more access to cameras/audio/satellite/science measurements, an AI can have original experience on a level that can only be described as god-like compared to humans.

keiferski 2mo ago
And at this point you’re far off into science fiction, and beyond reasonable discussion of this. Even then, it’s not really clear to me that an android with the exact appearance of a person will have the same experiences. They aren’t biological creatures with millions of years of evolution behind them.
kraai 2mo ago
You could argue AI already partly has access to these measurements. You could easily tap into smart sensor data etc, same voor video/audio etc. The part that AI can't (yet) truly replicate is 'feelings/emotions'. Experiences such feeling dread, loneliness, happiness. Or being anxious, nervous or having goosebumps. You can describe all these states but they are differently experienced for each individual and also dependent on each unique situation. Ofcourse this also then comes down to how you exactly define emotions.
- exe34 2mo ago
  We don't know that Claude doesn't feel dread when it looks at my code. To be fair, these emotional circuits are the result of evolving in various environments. AI might well have completely new emotions that we just can't comprehend.
EGG_CREAM 2mo ago
If it has a subjective viewpoint, i.e. sentience. Otherwise it still doesn’t actually experience any of those things, and can’t tell actually you what it’s like to experience those things. It can give you the data readings though.
- brazzy 2mo ago
  Wouldn't it be funny if they missing thing is actually the body, and having one to give the subjective viewpoint something to center on directly leads to emerging sentience? Though I think there's at least one more important thing missing, namely the ability to form memories - to incorporate recent context into the model's weights. I don't think it's a coincidence that this is a very complex process in humans as well (involving sleep and dreams as neccessary mechanisms).

rahimnathwani 2mo ago

ChatGPT has had more conversations than you or I have. And it's conversed with people from a wider range of backgrounds in a wider range of situations.

keiferski 2mo ago
And? Can you tell me what it feels like to eat a hamburger by asking a thousand people about it?
- rahimnathwani 2mo ago
  Yes, of course.
  - keiferski 2mo ago
    That’s a pretty lacking theory of knowledge. How can you know what taste is, if you’re never tasted anything? If you read a thousand books about living in New York City, is that the same thing as the experiential knowledge that comes from living there in person? I certainly don’t think so.
    - rahimnathwani 2mo ago
      keiferski didn't ask for a theory of knowledge. You're moving the goalposts.
      - keiferski 2mo ago
        That's literally what the conversation is about: what is knowledge? You cannot claim that descriptive knowledge of something is equivalent to experiential knowledge of it, unless you have a theory of knowledge explaining why this is the case.
        rahimnathwani 2mo ago
        You asked for a description: "Can you tell me what it feels like to eat a hamburger" I am sure I Fable (or GPT-5.6-Sol) could answer this question very well. It can probably even tell us what it feels like to eat a hamburger for the first time when you spent the first 18 years of your life as a vegetarian.