Post

Thank you, I enjoyed reading this. The only weak point, in my mind, is how he argues near the end that AI gaining sentience is "absurd", because it's just a "word-guessing program".

I'm not convinced. plausibly: a human mind contains an important system that's quite close to a word guessing program with a lot of words (and the way it gets good at predicting the next word is that it encodes/is endowed with a model of the world those words originated in)

either LLMs are a worthy step on the path to AGI, or they are a local and extraordinarily-wasteful maxima we'll know when AGI is achieved, and probably no sooner :) but I think folks in both camps should "devil's advocate" their own thinking, what if the other folks are right?

theconversation.comA neuroscientist explains why it’s impossible for AI to ‘understand’ languageDescribing artificial intelligence as having neural networks and understanding language has implications for how we understand both AI and the human brain.

"while some computer code can respond to human language in the form of text, it does not come close to capturing what humans — and their brains — accomplish in their understanding" i expected the article to try to support this claim, instead it just ended.