Hacker News Reader

Comment by ThalesX | Hacker News Reader

I love talking to GPT, but I've tried using it for some serious stuff (research, biz-dev) and less than serious stuff (Dungeons & Dragons) and the magic is still there but it has obvious blind spots which might be solved in the future but we're talking about the present.

I am wholly amused how everyone got on that dude from Google that accused the AI of being sentient and Google about not caring, and now you have huge names in the tech industry kinda drooling over this with what I believe to be the same passion.

One was ridiculed, the others will continue to be our 'heroes'.

View on HN

> I am wholly amused how everyone got on that dude from Google that accused the AI of being sentient and Google about not caring, and now you have huge names in the tech industry kinda drooling over this with what I believe to be the same passion.

Is it strange? Someone can be extremely impressed with how a Boston Dynamic robot moves, while also being entirely unconvinced by claims that the lifelike movement is a sign of sentience.

> Someone can be extremely impressed with how a Boston Dynamic robot moves, while also being entirely unconvinced by claims that the lifelike movement is a sign of sentience.

Especially as those devices are all coded in a traditional manner, with no ML or NNs at all.

> while also being entirely unconvinced by claims that the lifelike movement is a sign of sentience.

Well, would one suspect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Locomotion of being sentient?

> drooling over this with what I believe to be the same passion.

Lemoine didn't get fired and mocked for being "passionate" about LaMDA, he got fired for breaching NDA and mocked for claiming that a LLM is sentient.

Ben Thompson isn't claiming ChatGPT is sentient, or that it has personhood, and that is the categorical difference. It's a far, far weaker claim that ChatGPT's text output is (perhaps) good enough to fool a school teacher in a school essay.

The guy who suggested the AI was sentient was clearly wrong, and strange in a bad way. ChatGPT enthusiasts are just having a good time with a text generation AI. How did you even come up with this comparison?

There's a huge gap between "The breadth of training this AI has and the depth of its processing is impressive" and "This script is sentient". The latter is a _far_ broader (and unsubstantiated) claim.

Not to mention when Google first started showing specific snippets for queries that could be answered with a sentence. People were up in arms that Google is stealing their content.

Come today and people seem to not mind so much. Is the same thing? Maybe not but it does look similar to me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com