Raw LLM Responses

> I sit and stare at the wall and I just think that that intelligence is a difference of of kind rather than o degree because there might be something different about what's what's going on in here versus what's going on in these current algorithms. Even if this is true, quoting gwern's clippy story: > We should pause to note that a Clippy^2 still doesn’t really think or plan. It’s not really conscious. It is just an unfathomably vast pile of numbers produced by mindless optimization starting from a small seed program that could be written on a few pages. > It has no qualia, no intentionality, no true self-awareness, no grounding in a rich multimodal real-world process of cognitive development yielding detailed representations and powerful causal models of reality which all lead to the utter sublimeness of what it means to be human; it cannot ‘want’ anything beyond maximizing a mechanical reward score, which does not come close to capturing the rich flexibility of human desires, or resolving the historical Eurocentric contingency of such narrow conceptualizations, which are, at root, problematically Cartesian. > When it ‘plans’, it would be more accurate to say it fake-plans; when it ‘learns’, it fake-learns; when it ‘thinks’, it is just interpolating between memorized data points in a high-dimensional space, and any interpretation of such fake-thoughts as real thoughts is highly misleading; when it takes ‘actions’, they are fake-actions optimizing a fake-learned fake-world, and are not real actions, any more than the people in a simulated rainstorm really get wet, rather than fake-wet. > (The deaths, however, are real.)