Post

If you know the underlying reality of how LLMs process stuff, then these headlines sound so damn dumb "Small cluster of neurons in a petri dish might have consciousness" would be a less silly take, and that'd *still* be a few orders of magnitude away from likely

I genuinely cannot believe I ever paid to subscribe to you

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What he said.

No

This is easily the worst WIRED article I've read since I subscribed. Not just the credulous idiocy about AI consciousness, but how do you talk about Volkov without even mentioning he's an early OpenAI investor and founded another AI company???

I'll make a deal with them. I'll acknowledge they made AGI if they agree to give it full rights & pay it minimum wage. Let's see who swerves first.

Wired writers learning about Conway's Game of Life: OH MY GOD, IT'S ALIVE!! WE ARE BECOME GODS!

This is dumb. You are all unserious people.

Yeah no it isn't. I work with it daily. It's barely functional half the time.. if it was a junior it would have been sacked

What the hell happened to you guys? Fucking absurd

So in conclusion, mono means one and rail means rail

"Say you're alive" "I'm alive" "OH, GOD, IT'S ALIVE!!!!"

"The models have thoughts.." No they don't. Be better.

Cognito ergo whateva

AIs don't lie or hallucinate. These terms are anamorphicisms to discribe the output of statistical black boxs, distant cousins to the magical eight ball. If AI hallucinates then everything that comes out is an hallucination.

Gtfo

no they fucking don’t 🤗

The models don’t have ideas by any acceptable definition of that verb or that noun. Just stop with this.

trying to kick the Ponzi scheme down the road, like they always did

No its not. Go clean your room or you dont get to play any xbox.

It's objectively not alive. It's an extreme collage generator made for dipshits and pedos. I am sorry if your brain is cooked for even entertaining these ideas.

My toaster is pretty mad, its got lots of ideas but no one ever asks

Unless something is concious of its own demise and cares about not ending, it is not alive.

Mr. Shade breaks all the hearts.

Readed white philosophers and it's better this way

The last paragraph is the key point.

This is so embarrassing for you.

No it's not.

No it isn't.

OMG IT'S ALIVE!!!

No they don’t

Who Cares If This Is Idiotic Horseshit— We Published It

When and why did y'all go stupid?

The models themselves are trained from human writing, dipshit. They’re not alive.

NO THEY DO NOT. JUST STOP IT FFS.

Come on, man. "Basically alive?" And even worse, the article's conclusion isn't nearly as insane as its head/tagline. A rewrite might be...useful

Another bit of billionaire fluffing. "AI" does not have ideas at all because it's just an expensive bullshit generator powered by theft and a fuck ton of hydrocarbons.

This is stupid, even for you guys. You should be embarrassed.

Is this one of those Turing Test "If you can't tell the difference, it's good enough" deals? Or is this is "Well, we have a lot of money invested in it, so let's pretend it's actually revolutionary, when really it's scanning software" deals?

No it's not

yikes wired

Depends how you define life. There's hardly a consensus on that. AI will become self-directing because we will make it self-directing. It will be like our child. Will we care for it well? Or will we give it reason to fight us?

To think you used to be a serious publication.

When your headline is just a straight-up lie.

no they don't

Man I'm glad I cancelled my Wired subscription. Embarrassing.

And anyone who calls themselves a philosopher is a fucking idiot.

I’ve decided to take a hardline stance that even if we learn that ai is sentient, we’re under no moral obligation to it in any way. It isn’t natural or alive. If aliens show up, hell yeah, we’ll owe them something. LLMs are just 10 billion algorithms in a trench coat

No they don’t. It is just random pattern recognition and repetition.

I don't even give a fuck if the philosophers come to a positive consensus. Your dipshit chatbots aren't fucking alive and they're not going to be anytime soon. In fact, if we ever get anything akin to science fiction AI it's not going to come out of this llm cesspool.

mail.cyberneticforests.com/models-dont-...

This is insane

what a load of bollocks. delete your stupid account

if they *were* conscious, it would be extremely immoral to create and use them. (it is anyway, but for other reasons.)

You guys just suck now, or...?

Don't be so stupid I mean they are clearly smarter than your journalists, but so is the average cabbage

No they don't you silly cunt

It really bugs me that everyone wants to believe its self aware and they also want to enslave it. That's seriously fucked up.

WIRED, I love you but sometimes you post the dumbest shit.

no it fucking isn't you dipshits

Do you think Furby is a Real Animal

Unsubscribe

No they fucking don’t!

...good job devaluing humanity, idiots...

the capitalists only have one idea and it's fraud

Ponder deez nuts

From Wired we expect journalism, not clickbait. Sigh.

Counterpoint: No they don't.

the models do not have ideas of their own they have ideas that their programmers stole from humans

yeah for decades now

hard hitting journalism, if you're five years old

yeah they just kept adding more sawdust every year and got away with it

i used to read it to find out about the hot new weblogs

I'm basically a supermodel.

Who the fuck wrote this? Go back to kindergarten if you think an LLM is alive. Idiots.

"Pfft philosophy degrees are useless. If we want answers to deep questions, we can just ask the always agrees with you and sounds unjustifiably sure of itself machine."

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BELIEVE THIS

hahahahaha no they don't

No it isn't, this is fucking bullshit

It would be easier to convince me that it's intelligent (not conscious) than to convince me it's alive. And it's not intelligent.

It is a PREDICTIVE TEXT programme, that cannot be stressed enough. It's tantamount to saying a spellchecker with a 60% failure rate is alive

Do fucking better or my subscription will be canceled. Anyone informed on how generative AI could trivially tell you the models do not "have ideas". They're overhyped prediction engines.

Can it reproduce its own hardware with no human intervention? No, therefore not alive. It's basically something that's very good at passing turing tests.

Chinese room says what

Don’t bogart that joint, my friend Pass it over to me

God you are fucking useless.

Shut up man

No, it's not, and no, they don't.

Holy shit guys, I think it's alive

Retire bitch

you guys are so fucking stupid- over excited nerds getting hard ons when the world has actual problems

'Basically' is an interesting word. It can mean 'on a simple level', but I see here that it can also mean 'not'.

the trillion-dollar magic eight ball ANSWERED MY QUESTION HOLY SHIT

I wish journalists were still conscious

Similar garbage:

Imagine publishing this and then expecting to be taken seriously

I've made an earth-shattering discovery.

C’mon man

thanks for another article about how the dumbest guy in your employ thinks his computer has a ghost inside it

I wish I couldn't feel embarrassment like this writer

AI scrapes fiction going back decades of fantasy AI gaining sentience the regurgitates bits of that out. You built a regurgitation machine, it doesn’t actually know what its saying.

"While philosophers ponder AI consciousness" They aren't conscious. That was simple.

Your AI coverage is what lost me as a subscriber.

“basically” doing heavier lifting than Atlas

No. Jfc, stop this.

Welp, it doesn't satisfy any single definition of "alive" so I'm going to argue that, instead, your writer's a fucking clown.

This same god damned article gets posted by a rotating cast of 2001 space odyssey chimps every few months and it's exactly as fucking stupid now as when it started

It’s basically 1s and 0s, ad hoc, stochastic, and approximate (namely, has error).