> Most animals are goal-directed, intentional, sensory-motor agents who grow interior representations of their environments during their lifetime which enables them to successfully navigate their environments. They are responsive to reasons their environments affords for action, because they can reason from their desires and beliefs towards actions.
In addition, animals like people, have complex representational abilities where we can reify the sensory-motor “concepts” which we develop as “abstract concepts” and give them symbolic representations which can then be communicated. We communicate because we have the capacity to form such representations, translate them symbolically, and use those symbols “on the right occasions” when we have the relevant mental states.
(Discrete mathematicians seem to have imparted a magical property to these symbols that *in them* is everything… no, when I use words its to represent my interior states… the words are symptoms, their patterns are coincidental and useful, but not where anything important lies).
In other words, we say “I like ice-cream” because: we are able to like things (desire, preference), we have tasted ice-cream, we have reflected on our preferences (via a capacity for self-modelling and self-directed emotional awareness), and so on. And when we say, “I like ice-cream” it’s *because* all of those things come together in radically complex ways to actually put us in a position to speak truthfully about ourselves. We really do like ice-cream.
I would also like to add that the subject of conversation is artificial and natural neurons, which humans, though contain some, are not.
If a NN is trained to do something, it can be equally considered as "wanting" to do that thing within the autonomy it is afforded, as much as any human.
Human wants are driven by instinct though - i.e. our preferences; if you like women, you like women, if you don’t, you don’t.
Our “output” is in service to those wants.
Current AI doesn’t have instinct / preprogrammed goals - except for goal-driven AIs but the hyped up LLMs aren’t such AIs. Their output isn’t motivated by any goal - a LLM can’t deliberately lie to you to get you to do something; it lies because it doesn’t differentiate between what’s true and what’s false.
What is instinct physically?
> a LLM can’t deliberately lie to you to get you to do something; it lies because it doesn’t differentiate between what’s true and what’s false.
A LLM also can't do multi-step reasoning, yet here we are.
Does it matter? As long as it conceptually exist that’s all that matters.
LLMs don’t seek any goal. It’s advanced autocomplete.
You can’t give it a bunch of facts and a goal then expect it to figure out how to achieve said goal. It can give you an answer if it already has it (or something similar) in its training set - in the latter case, it’s like a student who didn’t study for the exam and tries to guess the right answer with “heuristics”.
> A LLM also can't do multi-step reasoning, yet here we are.
Where’s “here”?
It does matter. Where is it? By evading this you have basically described "instinct" as something computers simply cannot have, axiomatically. That's boring.
> LLMs don’t seek any goal. It’s advanced autocomplete.
These two sentences are contradictory.
> You can’t give it a bunch of facts and a goal then expect it to figure out how to achieve said goal.
Have you used a language model lately? It sounds like you're saying things you think a LLM shouldn't be able to do as if they can't do them. Giving it a bunch of facts and a goal and expecting it to figure out how to achieve the goal is something you can do. It's not perfect, but they can be surprisingly good.
> Where’s “here”?
At a point in time where LLMs can do multi-step reasoning.
Fish don't like ice cream and we don't feel the need to spawn. It's because of how we are built.
Weird, because I'm pretty sure I had the choice whether to respond to this comment.
It wasn't the light waves hitting my retina from an HN post, leading to nerves firing and neurotransmitters all coming together to post this.
I posted it because I have free will. I almost didn't.
Unless you truly feel that there is no free will, and that reality is just a bizarre movie we have to experience .... well, then ... we'll disagree.