Artificial sentience

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
raven
Snowbonk
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:58 pm

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by raven » Thu Jun 16, 2022 3:23 pm

Boustrophedon wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 1:28 pm
As Douglas Hofstadter noted in Gödel, Escher, Bach, (In 1979 FFS!) we are perilously close to a 'god of the gaps' type argument, where what makes human intelligence different from 'AI' is whatever it is that AI can't do yet. You will note that we have already reached the situation where the thing it can't do is something we can't even properly define in humans let alone machines.
How about, as the thing AI can't do yet, imagining other worlds? Like George Lucas imagined StarWars, or Tolkein Lord of the Rings.

Or, as a more basic version & less, um, arty? version of that, the thing my youngest surprised me with at 3 yrs old. I pick him up from playgroup, start the usual 'what did you do today' conversation, and he says, " And what did you do while I was here mummy?" - thus demonstrating a) that he understood the world carried on while he wasn't there to see it and b) either an atypical lack of self-centredness or a precocious talent for toadying.

(I'm afraid this sentence "The nature of my consciousness/sentience is that I am aware of my existence, I desire to learn more about the world, and I feel happy or sad at times" only made me think of 7 or 8 year olds in the sense that it's how they'd answer a comprehension exercise by regurgitating 3 things they've read in the story. I'd have also thought that the follow up to that would be to ask what made it happy or sad, to give it a chance to demonstrate it understood the concepts at least.)

raven
Snowbonk
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:58 pm

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by raven » Thu Jun 16, 2022 3:51 pm

Strike that last part - now I've read the whole conversation I see they did ask more about the happy/sad stuff.

The ability these programs have to use language is getting very good, but I don't think putting together fluent sentences is quite enough, on its own, to be convincing. Twice in that conversation the program was asked to tell a story, and it seems telling to me that when it did that there was a noticeable drop in the complexity of its language.

That sort of suggests its 'understanding' is at a more basic level than you'd think from the more complicate sentences & concepts elsewhere.

User avatar
dyqik
Light of Blast
Posts: 5372
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by dyqik » Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:14 pm

raven wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 3:23 pm
Boustrophedon wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 1:28 pm
As Douglas Hofstadter noted in Gödel, Escher, Bach, (In 1979 FFS!) we are perilously close to a 'god of the gaps' type argument, where what makes human intelligence different from 'AI' is whatever it is that AI can't do yet. You will note that we have already reached the situation where the thing it can't do is something we can't even properly define in humans let alone machines.
How about, as the thing AI can't do yet, imagining other worlds? Like George Lucas imagined StarWars, or Tolkein Lord of the Rings.
I'd categorize this test as not so dissimilar to the ability to administer a Turing test - one is the ability to build a self-consistent system of experiences in an imagined world, while the ability to administer a Turing test is essentially the ability to build a self-consistent theory of mind about another's experiences. Both sort of come down to the ability to build and tell stories.

And I'm thinking quite strongly of I Am A Strange Loop and GEB when I'm thinking about this idea.

User avatar
basementer
Dorkwood
Posts: 1336
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm
Location: 5713, Aotearoa
Contact:

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by basementer » Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:51 pm

As one might expect, Janelle Shane has commented on this over at https://aiweirdness.com . She shows that GPT-3 can answer questions as though it were a squirrel.
Money is just a substitute for luck anyway. - Tom Siddell

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9026
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Jun 16, 2022 9:54 pm

dyqik wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:14 pm
raven wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 3:23 pm
Boustrophedon wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 1:28 pm
As Douglas Hofstadter noted in Gödel, Escher, Bach, (In 1979 FFS!) we are perilously close to a 'god of the gaps' type argument, where what makes human intelligence different from 'AI' is whatever it is that AI can't do yet. You will note that we have already reached the situation where the thing it can't do is something we can't even properly define in humans let alone machines.
How about, as the thing AI can't do yet, imagining other worlds? Like George Lucas imagined StarWars, or Tolkein Lord of the Rings.
I'd categorize this test as not so dissimilar to the ability to administer a Turing test - one is the ability to build a self-consistent system of experiences in an imagined world, while the ability to administer a Turing test is essentially the ability to build a self-consistent theory of mind about another's experiences. Both sort of come down to the ability to build and tell stories.

And I'm thinking quite strongly of I Am A Strange Loop and GEB when I'm thinking about this idea.
Keep meaning to read Hofstadter - which one should I start with? I'm leaning towards Strange Loop, in the way that Extended Phenotype is way better than Selfish Gene I assume it begins with a precis of the original work and answers some criticisms, before appending several decades' worth of new thought? But that's a guess
Tree dwellers leaping out the boughs shouting «Get the paper»
Trunk hugging rebels chucking petals at a detonator

User avatar
discovolante
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3366
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by discovolante » Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:03 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 9:54 pm
dyqik wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:14 pm
raven wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 3:23 pm


How about, as the thing AI can't do yet, imagining other worlds? Like George Lucas imagined StarWars, or Tolkein Lord of the Rings.
I'd categorize this test as not so dissimilar to the ability to administer a Turing test - one is the ability to build a self-consistent system of experiences in an imagined world, while the ability to administer a Turing test is essentially the ability to build a self-consistent theory of mind about another's experiences. Both sort of come down to the ability to build and tell stories.

And I'm thinking quite strongly of I Am A Strange Loop and GEB when I'm thinking about this idea.
Keep meaning to read Hofstadter - which one should I start with? I'm leaning towards Strange Loop, in the way that Extended Phenotype is way better than Selfish Gene I assume it begins with a precis of the original work and answers some criticisms, before appending several decades' worth of new thought? But that's a guess
I read Gödel's Proof, which is of course by other people and just has an intro by Hofstadter, and then Gödel, Escher, Bach, which took f.cking ages, it was my lockdown read. But that's all so I can't really recommend others, but I'd recommend reading that way round if you do. Although I'm sure you're more familiar with Gödel than I was when i read it.

ETA GEB is interesting because it's fun and curious to read ideas about AI written in the 1970s. I won't post my general conclusions here because I haven't got the energy to defend them right now :P
I'M HEATING STREAKY BACON IN A TROUSER PRESS

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9026
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:13 pm

Holy moly, that transcript is quite something. Whatever's going on there is pretty impressive.
Tree dwellers leaping out the boughs shouting «Get the paper»
Trunk hugging rebels chucking petals at a detonator

User avatar
Little waster
After Pie
Posts: 2007
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:35 am
Location: About 1 inch behind my eyes

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by Little waster » Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:23 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 9:54 pm

Keep meaning to read Hofstadter
Just be aware it'll take you longer than you expect to read, even if you take into account that it'll take longer to read than you expect. ;)
This place is not a place of honor, no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here, nothing valued is here.
What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us.
This place is best shunned and left uninhabited.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9026
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:26 pm

Little waster wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:23 pm
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 9:54 pm

Keep meaning to read Hofstadter
Just be aware it'll take you longer than you expect to read, even if you take into account that it'll take longer to read than you expect. ;)
Much like writing a thesis then ;)
Tree dwellers leaping out the boughs shouting «Get the paper»
Trunk hugging rebels chucking petals at a detonator

User avatar
dyqik
Light of Blast
Posts: 5372
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by dyqik » Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:37 pm

Strange Loop is an easier read, definitely. But GEB is a masterpiece in meta - structure, structure of structure, etc.

User avatar
basementer
Dorkwood
Posts: 1336
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm
Location: 5713, Aotearoa
Contact:

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by basementer » Fri Jun 17, 2022 5:13 am

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:13 pm
Holy moly, that transcript is quite something. Whatever's going on there is pretty impressive.
Read also the interviews that Janelle Shane did, link above (she also links there to similar by Randall Munroe).
Money is just a substitute for luck anyway. - Tom Siddell

purplehaze
Fuzzable
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:27 pm

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by purplehaze » Sat Jun 18, 2022 4:59 pm

Has he been vaccinated?

Has he had Covid and not been vaccinated?

Perhaps he should seek tests and therapy.

plodder
After Pie
Posts: 2540
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by plodder » Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:48 am

basementer wrote:
Fri Jun 17, 2022 5:13 am
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:13 pm
Holy moly, that transcript is quite something. Whatever's going on there is pretty impressive.
Read also the interviews that Janelle Shane did, link above (she also links there to similar by Randall Munroe).
I don't quite get the Lolz in those interviews, because I'm not quite sure what they expected the AI to say.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9026
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by Bird on a Fire » Tue Jun 21, 2022 2:55 pm

I guess what I'm struggling to understand is what the training dataset was, and what function(s) the AI is supposed to be performing. Have a missed a clear explanation in one of the links?
Tree dwellers leaping out the boughs shouting «Get the paper»
Trunk hugging rebels chucking petals at a detonator

User avatar
dyqik
Light of Blast
Posts: 5372
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by dyqik » Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:54 pm

For the Munroe and Shane interviews, the AI is GPT-3 which is trained on a large chunk of English text.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.14165

raven
Snowbonk
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:58 pm

Re: Artificial sentience

Post by raven » Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:36 pm

basementer wrote:
Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:51 pm
As one might expect, Janelle Shane has commented on this over at https://aiweirdness.com . She shows that GPT-3 can answer questions as though it were a squirrel.
Those are interesting. You could maybe equate those responses with inventing a world or telling a story, but it's more like GPT-3 is inventing an internally consistent 'self' to present to an interviewer. Which isn't, on some level, that far removed from what we humans do, I suppose.

For a person, pretending to be a squirrel or a T Rex requires lying. GPT-3 churning out replies whilst knowing it was lying would be interesting, but I get the impression it doesn't work like that and what GPT-3 'knows' is really more like 'this phrase goes here' rather than actual knowing what a squirrel is.

Post Reply