To go deeper: some animals act curiously, others with fear, but only a few of them understand what the mirror does and use it to inspect themselves.

  • minnow
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The mirror test is frequently cited as a means of testing sentience.

    OP I think you hit the nail on the head.

    • Aerosol3215@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      Based on the fact that most people don’t see their interaction with the LLM as gazing into the mirror, am I being led to believe that most people are not sentient???

    • Carnelian
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Except it’s not their reflection, it’s a string of phrases presented to you based partly on the commonality of similar phrases appearing next to one another in the training data, and partly on mysterious black box modifications! Fun!

    • ameancowdeleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      deleted by creator

  • cally [he/they]@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 months ago

    Related: is there a name for “question bias”?

    Like asking ChatGPT if “is x good?”, and it would reply “Yes, x is good.” but if you ask “is x bad?” it would reply “Yes, x is bad, you’re right.”

      • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        It is not a leading question. The answer just happens to be meaningless.

        Asking whether something is good is the vast majority of human concern. Most of our rational activity is fundamentally evaluative.

    • certified_expertOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I disagree about the dichotomy. I think you can (1) understand what LLMs actually are. (2) See the value of such technology.

      In both cases being factual (not being deceived) and not being malicious (not attempting to deceive others)

      I think a reasonable use of these tools is as a “sidekick” (you being the main character). Some tasks can be assigned to it so you save some time, but the thinking and the actual mental model of what is being done shall always be your responsibility.

      For example, LLMs are good as an interface to quickly lookup within manuals, books, clarify specific concepts, or find the proper terms for a vague idea (so that you can research the topic using the appropriate terms)

      Of course, this is just an opinion. 100% open to discussion.

      • BanMe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think of it like a nonhuman character, like a character in a book I’m reading. Is it real? No. Is it compelling? Yes. Do I know exactly what it’ll do next? No. Is it serving a purpose in my life? Yes.

        It effectively attends to my requests and even feelings but I do not reciprocate that. I’ve got decades of sci-fi leading me up to this point, the idea of interacting with humanoid robots or AI has been around since my childhood, but it’s never involved attending to the machine’s feelings or needs.

        We need to sort out the boundaries on this, the delusional people who are having “relationships” with AI, getting a social or other emotional fix from it. But that doesn’t mean we have to categorize anyone who uses it as moronic. It’s a tool.

    • naught101
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Marketing is a valid use for AI (because bullshit was always thewod anyway)

    • certified_expertOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      lol, Is that the same gorilla that you see in other bathrooms? Or (like me) you meet a new gorilla every time you wash your hands?

      • GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think he’s the same guy. I used to try to bust him up but he just kept multiplying into more pieces and then coming back whole every time I saw a new mirror, so I eventually gave up

  • ameancowdeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    deleted by creator

    • Arthur Besse@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      from page 7 of Joseph Weizenbaum’s Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgement to Calculation (1976):

      screenshot of PDF of page 7: Introduction
intimate thoughts; clear evidence that people were conversing with
the computer as if it were a person who could be appropriately and
usefully addressed in intimate terms. I knew of course that people
form all sorts of emotional bonds to machines, for example, to mu-
sical instruments, motorcycles, and cars. And I knew from long ex-
perience that the strong emotional ties many programmers have to
their computers are often formed after only short exposures to their
machines. What I had not realized is that extremely short exposures
to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful de-
lusional thinking in quite normal people. This insight led me to
attach new importance to questions of the relationship between the
individual and the computer, and hence to resolve to think about
them,
3. Another widespread, and to me surprising, reaction to the
ELIZA program was the spread of a belief that it demonstrated a
general solution to the problem of computer understanding of natu-
ral language. In my paper, I had tried to say that no general solution
to that problem was possible, ie., that language is understood only
in contextual frameworks, that even these can be shared by people
to only a limited extent, and that consequently even people are not
embodiments of any such general solution. But these conclusions
were often ignored, In any case, ELIZA was such a small and simple
step. Its contribution was, if any at all, only to vividly underline what
many others had long ago discovered, namely, the importance of
context to language understanding. The subsequent, much more
elegant, and surely more important work of Winograd in computer
comprehension of English is currently being misinterpreted just as
ELIZA was. This reaction to ELIZA showed me more vividly than
anything I had seen hitherto the enormously exaggerated attribu-
tions an even well-educated audience is capable of making, even
strives to make, to a technology it does not understand. Surely, I
thought, decisions made by the general public about emergent tech-
nologies depend much more on what that public attributes to such
technologies than on what they actually are or can and cannot do. If,
as appeared to be the case, the public's attributions are wildly mis-
conceived, then public decisions are bound to be misguided and

      a pdf of the whole book is available here

  • Lost_My_Mind
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    Huh…so what you’re saying is that mirrors are actually AI.

    THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE!!! EVERYBODY COVER YOUR MIRRORS!!!

    • certified_expertOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hahah, yeah, maybe I am doing that. that’s why it is a shower thought, not a research paper proposal.

      The thought comes from my (kind or recent) study of the algebra/calculus under LLMs (at least the feedforward and backpropagation part of them)

      The interesting part is that my ass is non-differentiable at x=0:

      Lim x0⁺ δass/δx
      ≠
      Lim x0⁻ δass/δx
      
  • Ironfacebuster
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    My dog used to stare at me through mirrors, so what does that mean for her intelligence? Hyper intelligent. Red heelers will take over the world.

  • CIA_chatbot
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I find this kind of Anti AI Sentience bigotry horrible!

    • certified_expertOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Interesting take. Could you elaborate?

      My post comes from the study of the algebra and stats that enable LLMs (well, part of it. i am not done with the “attention”.

  • Supervisor194
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    False. My reflection can’t tell me that pressing the Steam button and X will bring up the keyboard on Steam Deck’s desktop mode.

    • lennee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      pressing and holding the steam button tells u every steam shortcut