• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Google Engineer Blake Lemoine Claims AI Bot Became Sentient

They are conscious, aware of the magnetic field of the magnet.

But not of the magnet or the field! Just the electromagnetic force! Become consciously aware of what I wrote!!!!!! I was trying to make a point that just flew right over your head. Awareness is not synonymous with consciousness.

...You clearly don't have a strong model of "consciousness", whereas while you may not like or want to apply my model, you can't but to admit it is fairly general and extensible. At the very least it allows me to set goals, identify insufficiencies, and understand systems well enough to avoid what is almost certainly a very problematic No-True-Scotsman on your part.

Do you think you have a better model of consciousness than professional philosophers and psychologists? Did you at least look at the links I gave you? Are you even consciously aware of what a No True Scotsman fallacy is? How does that relate to anything I said? :poke_with_stick:


Again, your assertion that it is not conscious of the meanings of words is silly.

Of course, it may only know words in the context of other words, but I suspect the ability to generate images implies a variety of spatial models are active in it too.

Nothing to say about the concept of emergence, even though that was my main point? I give up.
 
Awareness is not synonymous with consciousness.
If you wish to defend this view, make a proper description of what consciousness is, separate from awareness.

You seem again to be making this statement of distinction between these things.

It is conscious exactly of what it is conscious of.

Whether you wish to play semantic fuck-fuck games over whether it's aware of the "magnet" or the "magnetic field of the magnet" is semantic when we are both discussing the fact that it is, exactly, the force directed upon it due to spin alignments that it is physically driven upon, and this effect that is had upon it is the thing described of "awareness", or discuss more useful and thus implementable ideas of what it means semantically to "to be conscious".

Then we can discuss what you mean by consciousness and invent that thing of our own hands, or acknowledge it.

Again, "conscious of what", "aware of what". In the mean time, I'm going to acknowledge that this system meets the important metrics of personhood.
 
OK, I'm fine with you doing what you want. For me, it's not worth going further with this conversation, since I don't think you really understand the points I've tried to make.
 
OK, I'm fine with you doing what you want. For me, it's not worth going further with this conversation, since I don't think you really understand the points I've tried to make.
And I don't think you've really understood my points. You want "consciousness" to be so much bigger than it is, or so much more specific, when it is not, and when you have NO basis to claim it is.
 
OK, I'm fine with you doing what you want. For me, it's not worth going further with this conversation, since I don't think you really understand the points I've tried to make.
And I don't think you've really understood my points. You want "consciousness" to be so much bigger than it is, or so much more specific, when it is not, and when you have NO basis to claim it is.

None that you are aware of. I'll stipulate to that.
 
Did LaMDa just pass the Turing test? - Quora
Anthony Atkielski
Jun 16

No. The bot uses friendly phrases, but you can still tell that something is amiss, if you observe the conversation closely. Of course, many people don’t really listen to others to begin with, so they are unlikely to notice. This was truer even with ELIZA.
So it was fakery by seeming friendly.

I.—COMPUTING MACHINERY AND INTELLIGENCE | Mind | Oxford Academic
Alan Turing, Mind, Volume LIX, Issue 236, October 1950, Pages 433–460, 01 October 1950

He decided to short-circuit the question of whether or not computers can think by asking if they can act like they think. Thus, his Turing Test, of whether a chatbot's conversation can be indistinguishable from a human being's conversation.

He imagined this example:
Q: Please write me a sonnet on the subject of the Forth Bridge.
A: Count me out on this one. I never could write poetry.
Q: Add 34957 to 70764
A: (Pause about 30 seconds and then give as answer) 105621.
Q: Do you play chess?
A: Yes.
Q: I have K at my K1, and no other pieces. You have only K at K6 and R at R1. It is your move. What do you play?
A: (After a pause of 15 seconds) R-R8 mate.
I'm not very familiar with the Forth Bridge - it's a railroad bridge a little northwest of Edinburgh, Scotland.

One of them is an effort to imitate doing calculations in one's head. 30 seconds, then an incorrect answer. The correct one is 105721, and most computer hardware can do it much faster -- and will take much longer to format the result and emit it than to calculate it.

The chess notation is old descriptive notation, something now superseded by algebraic notation. I'll imitate it in algebraic notation and disambiguate it for that notation:

Q: I am White and my K is at e1, and I have no other pieces. You are Black and your K is at e3 and your R at h8, and you also have no other pieces. What do you play?
A: (After a pause of 15 seconds) Rh1 mate.
 
Alan Turing addressed several objections:
  1. The Theological Objection
  2. The ‘Heads in the Sand’ Objection
  3. The Mathematical Objection
  4. The Argument from Consciousness
  5. Arguments from Various Disabilities
  6. Lady Lovelace's Objection
  7. Argument from Continuity in the Nervous System
  8. The Argument from Informality of Behaviour
  9. The Argument from Extra-Sensory Perception
 
One can find online several versions of early chatbot ELIZA, Like Eliza, a chatbot therapist

I find ELIZA to be almost stupefyingly dumb. Friendly but dumb, like a cat.

There's another early chatbot, PARRY, which imitates someone who is obsessed with horse races and gambling and bookies. "PARRY" refers to "paranoid", about what this chatbot thinks about bookies. It was more successful, because it has a very limited domain.  PARRY Nobody has created an online version, however, as far as I have been able to find out.

PARRY: The AI chatbot from 1972 - Phrasee - with ELIZA meeting PARRY
 
Back
Top Bottom