Подтвердите e-mail

Для публикаций, комментариев, реакций и сообщений подтвердите адрес.

Публикация

Предыдущая публикация

I have been saying this for DECADES: define "intelligent" in an objective, testable manner.

250

Yes, and intelligence, consciousness, self-awareness, all tied together in my mind. And hard to define. I used to use Data as a working model. Specialized brain HW. Conscious & self-aware. But now LLMs are so close to that "ideal" that I've had to rethink & now just don't know or have a model.

Обсуждение

1 прямых ответов · 3 сообщений

This I believe: self-awareness is the side-effect of the ability to plan ahead, factoring in time values. I do not believe it can be objectively tested, but the basis for it probably can. (That is: if something cannot plan steps in advance, based on past experience, it's probably not self-aware.)

Ответ для Sean Eric Fagan

The reason LLMs keep being flagged as "intelligent" is the same reason Eliza was: because, as human beings, we are evolved and conditioned to react to language, and something that communicates in language must be like us.

Ответ для Sean Eric Fagan

Intelligence, sentience, consciousness, for humans, should be defined by what it is, facts, biological facts People are not abstract concepts They're organic beings Remove a part of the brain: you're not experiencing consciousness anymore, long term memories, short term memories etc