zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. NobleL+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-02-09 13:22:26
Source for consciousness / intelligence to be "statistics"?

I don't think there is any because there is no functional model for what organic intelligence is or how it operates. There are plethora of fascinating attempts / models but only a subset implore that it is solely "statistical". And even if it was statistical, the implementation of the wet system is absolutely not like a gigantic list of vectorized (stripped of their essence) tokens

replies(4): >>whidde+C1 >>pixl97+z4 >>HarHar+o8 >>Bulgar+Km3
2. whidde+C1[view] [source] 2023-02-09 13:31:28
>>NobleL+(OP)
There’s a man who claims to have solved consciousness as a multilayered Bayesian prediction system.

See Scott Alexander for attempts to explain what is apparently impenetrable papers on it.

3. pixl97+z4[view] [source] 2023-02-09 13:49:13
>>NobleL+(OP)
Sources for intelligence to be magic? I mean we know it's complicated but intelligence also spans the smallest creatures on the planet to humans. This points at intelligence being a reduceable problem that is layered. On top of that it's unlikely we need to model nerve behavior to get something intelligence like output.
4. HarHar+o8[view] [source] 2023-02-09 14:06:01
>>NobleL+(OP)
That's like saying that airplanes aren't flying since they're not flapping their wings. Intelligence is a capability - not a specific mechanism.

Consciousness is a subjective experience (regardless of what you believe/understand to be responsible for that experience), so discussing "consciousness/intelligence" is rather like discussing "cabbages/automobiles".

5. Bulgar+Km3[view] [source] 2023-02-10 06:48:58
>>NobleL+(OP)
Look at how Microsoft is instructing GPT to become "Sydney" and re-evaluate your opinions about what is intelligence:

https://twitter.com/marvinvonhagen/status/162365814434901197...

[go to top]