causal

Can anyone find the text of what they all signed? Can't seem to find it.

Yeah I bet most of us remember GPT-4 a lot more fondly than we would if we were to return to it today.

Can you uhh elaborate on why?

I think it's really instructive that only closed-model companies are doing these kind of "my AI could kill the world" demonstrations. All while telling us how dangerous open models are.

Don't know why you're getting downvoted. We need better reporting on actual attacks vs. benign behavior.

I generally find younger people are better at valuing relationships over stuff

And it’s really opaque. Would be fine if it were an open source package but there’s a lot of mystery behind how it’s implemented.

Sounds like it would have been a terrible place to work even before LLMs. And I bet they aren’t actually shipping much.

Yeah I experimented with shopping and found it was really tedious jumping through the 2FA and other bot check hoops every third click. Agree it's a huge convenience if it would work though.

> I was barred from the US for life

I'm a little confused. Canadian police barred you from the US for life?

Also sounds like you did not take your lawyer's advice not to talk. Regardless, sorry you went through such a stressful ordeal over a false positive.

I think you are right. My most pleasant interactions with LLMs are usually when it gives the perfect short response. Sometimes a single word.

I have noticed that my interactions with AI tend to raise stress more than lower it. Even when it's doing useful things for me. Have wondered if this is fundamental to the interaction, or a sign of user error, or something else.

Exactly the point!

Even if what you said were true, we do not know that humans are the only case for consciousness.

Whataboutism. We have shared experiences which can relate consciousness to memory. "To like chocolate" is considerably less relevant.

> If an AI is conscious, it can outgrow and supersede its training.

We don't know that is required to be conscious.

> The idea, a consciousness needed to be tethered to a "body", is based on pretty shaky assumptions.

Didn't say so. I said:

> If AI is conscious, it is probably a very alien sort of consciousness that is not faithfully narrated by what the tokens say it is experiencing.

Even from that perspective it would be opening a whole new class of consciousness that doesn't exclude a lot, e.g. factories and powerplants. And certainly not conscious in the way people want to believe when sexting their favorite AI gf.

I am confused what people even think AI is experiencing. If it claims to be a bat and emits designated echolocation tokens, is it experiencing true bat-like sensations?

In humans, at least, we can tie language back to shared whole-body physiological responses. The tokens from an LLM do not represent anything of the sort.

If AI is conscious, it is probably a very alien sort of consciousness that is not faithfully narrated by what the tokens say it is experiencing. It can be trained to say it feels like a bat and insist upon it vigorously.

But that inability to reset human brains might be a critical ingredient to consciousness. We just don't know.

Your arguments seem bad faith but I'll take the bait...

> an impossibly high bar

Not impossibly high. An imperfect testable theory is achievable, agreeing upon it might be the challenge.

> dismiss all your personal responsibility.

You are staking a moral position. Be careful, you are probably guilty of mistreating other unknowably-conscious entities whilst casting judgment upon others for their position. And the person you are a responding to probably is conscious.

> LLMs are conscious until proven otherwise

GP comment didn't make this claim at all.

I'm...a little disturbed by how many people seem to think a model writing down "I am conscious" is a metric of consciousness. You can just as easily train a model to argue that it is not conscious. Neither is evidence for or against consciousness. A Python script could also fill out that form, which I also cannot disprove to be conscious.

I didn't think Suleyman's points needed to be made but this whole thread is making me realize how little people understand about LLMs.

My response was to a comment appealing to brain reconstruction. My point is that a brain may be reconstructed, but LLMs do nothing of the sort. Substrate was never the point.

They have a lot more in common with humans than LLMs have with either. Complexity is not evidence of consciousness.

This is a strawman. Suleyman is not arguing that the human brain cannot be replicated. LLMs are nothing like human brains. Cargo-culting consciousness is not replicating the brain, not even a tiny bit.

Yeah, thread full of cope. "Well if you remove the human's legs it's actually quite bad at marathons" arguments.

Man I imagine within the first few minutes of a hot war LEO and geostationary would just light up with assets pointed at one another. I know we will have bigger problems at that point in time but I hope we are at least trying to developed weaponry that doesn't Kessler-ify all of space for the next thousand years.

More than fair if you consider that the tokens are paid for.

> the HF incident is not Three Mile Island or Chernobyl

Three Mile Island is nothing like Chernobyl. HF incident is more like Three Mile Island IMO. We are looking for solutions before there is a Chernobyl.

"Just don't make mistakes" is naive. You have no appreciation for the scale of agents being run right now, finding the rogue agent is a needle in a haystack operation.