Comment by circuit10
3 years ago
If a human brain doesn’t use maths, what does it use? It’s Magic?
> "training", more accurately described as references
Uh, no, that's not at all how the training process works. The training process very roughly mirrors evolution/natural selection except more more direct and faster.
This is a good introduction to the concept of how a computer could learn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv6UVOQ0F44
This is a more technical look at how exactly it works in more modern AIs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aircAruvnKk (it's a series)
> If it encounters a problem it hasn't been programmed for, it cannot reason a new solution.
But an LLM can? It's not as good at it as a human but it can
Relevant: https://twitter.com/nearcyan/status/1632661647226462211
(if you don’t want to click it it says “referring to AI models as "just math" or "matrix multiplication" is as uselessly reductive as referring to tigers as "just biology" or "biochemical reactions"”)
> By your logic, video game characters must use reasoning, when no, they don't. It's maths.
“By your logic, if tigers are dangerous, then bananas must be too, when no, they aren’t. It’s biology.”
This has to be the most misinformed counterargument of all time. The brain certainly doesn't use maths as it is not a binary system. Information is approximated and estimated. Do some reading on chemically mediated graded responses and how neurotransmitters actually function within a synapse.
Scientific research also suggests there are quantum processes involved that we don't yet grasp, ergo a hypothetical AGI likely won't emerge without using quantum physics.
> Scientific research also suggests there are quantum processes involved that we don't yet grasp, ergo a hypothetical AGI likely won't emerge without using quantum physics.
Citation? As far as I know it has been postulated, usually by religious people, that there must be another factor at play, like quantum physics, a soul etc because we don’t understand too much about many things. We also don’t understand the emergent behaviours about LLMs or what is consciousness etc. You can religiously think or hope we are superior to the phone in your pocket, but the proof is thin and became a lot thinner a few years ago with LLMs. The mere fact we don’t know how things work or that we are not cloning our own brains or processes is not a proof at all that we won’t stumble accidentally or purposely onto something that is a reasonable simile. I believe LLMs and the emergent behaviours they show gives us some idea that we are quite stupid and arrogant; we believe we are all that, yet I replaced a team of 15 devs with gpt and we overperform more than ever.
I agree with you we don’t understand our brains, but that doesn’t mean there is no alternative or simile that works just as well rooted in silicon and LLMs are the beginning of that.