Comment by BulgarianIdiot
2 years ago
“It’s just statistics” is an evergreen way to dismiss AI. The problem is you’re also just statistics.
2 years ago
“It’s just statistics” is an evergreen way to dismiss AI. The problem is you’re also just statistics.
Source for consciousness / intelligence to be "statistics"?
I don't think there is any because there is no functional model for what organic intelligence is or how it operates. There are plethora of fascinating attempts / models but only a subset implore that it is solely "statistical". And even if it was statistical, the implementation of the wet system is absolutely not like a gigantic list of vectorized (stripped of their essence) tokens
That's like saying that airplanes aren't flying since they're not flapping their wings. Intelligence is a capability - not a specific mechanism.
Consciousness is a subjective experience (regardless of what you believe/understand to be responsible for that experience), so discussing "consciousness/intelligence" is rather like discussing "cabbages/automobiles".
Sources for intelligence to be magic? I mean we know it's complicated but intelligence also spans the smallest creatures on the planet to humans. This points at intelligence being a reduceable problem that is layered. On top of that it's unlikely we need to model nerve behavior to get something intelligence like output.
Look at how Microsoft is instructing GPT to become "Sydney" and re-evaluate your opinions about what is intelligence:
https://twitter.com/marvinvonhagen/status/162365814434901197...
There’s a man who claims to have solved consciousness as a multilayered Bayesian prediction system.
See Scott Alexander for attempts to explain what is apparently impenetrable papers on it.
Shh. The models don’t like hearing that.