I’m pulling the “twitter is a microblog” rule even though twitter is pretty mega now, hope that’s ok.

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Sure, you say you’re conscious. I can get an LLM to say it’s conscious too. This is why we need some method for measuring it. Otherwise how can I tell which of you is telling the truth?

    • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      This is called the problem of other minds. Of course I can’t be certain about the consciousness of others. I can only be certain about my own.

      We do have a way of measuring the correlates of consciousness. But we have no clue how to detect the presence of subjective experience using quantitative methods.

      Philosophy departments (which is where any discovery on this front will originate) are heavily defunded. If you’re waiting for physicists or biologists to figure this out you’ll be waiting even longer.

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Exactly, which is why it’s IMO a bit presumptuous to say with confidence that humans are conscious while LLMs are categorically not conscious. We don’t even really know what that means.

        I don’t personally think LLMs are conscious, at least not yet or not to the same degree that humans are. But that’s purely based on vibe, it’s not something I can know. We need to figure out what consciousness really is and how to measure it before we can say we know this with any certainty.

        • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          23 days ago

          It is not presumptuous at all. Inference to the best explanation is how you know (almost) anything.

          1. This table isn’t conscious.

          This is my justified belief. No inferential claim is guaranteed and all objective claims are inferential (which is why science isn’t absolute).

          That said, I have strong reasons to think that tables aren’t conscious. They might be, but I’m epistemically compelled to believe otherwise.

          1. ChatGPT isn’t conscious.

          Ditto. It would be irrational for me to believe otherwise given the strong evidence.

          That you “don’t know for sure” is an implied disclaimer for every scientific claim.

          If the evidence is ambiguous, we say so. Regarding ChatGPT, the evidence is unambiguous.

          1. I am conscious.

          This is a non-inferential claim that I know through direct contact with reality. It is a priori.