326

We are constantly fed a version of AI that looks, sounds and acts suspiciously like us. It speaks in polished sentences, mimics emotions, expresses curiosity, claims to feel compassion, even dabbles in what it calls creativity.

But what we call AI today is nothing more than a statistical machine: a digital parrot regurgitating patterns mined from oceans of human data (the situation hasn’t changed much since it was discussed here five years ago). When it writes an answer to a question, it literally just guesses which letter and word will come next in a sequence – based on the data it’s been trained on.

This means AI has no understanding. No consciousness. No knowledge in any real, human sense. Just pure probability-driven, engineered brilliance — nothing more, and nothing less.

So why is a real “thinking” AI likely impossible? Because it’s bodiless. It has no senses, no flesh, no nerves, no pain, no pleasure. It doesn’t hunger, desire or fear. And because there is no cognition — not a shred — there’s a fundamental gap between the data it consumes (data born out of human feelings and experience) and what it can do with them.

Philosopher David Chalmers calls the mysterious mechanism underlying the relationship between our physical body and consciousness the “hard problem of consciousness”. Eminent scientists have recently hypothesised that consciousness actually emerges from the integration of internal, mental states with sensory representations (such as changes in heart rate, sweating and much more).

Given the paramount importance of the human senses and emotion for consciousness to “happen”, there is a profound and probably irreconcilable disconnect between general AI, the machine, and consciousness, a human phenomenon.

https://archive.ph/Fapar

(page 6) 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org -2 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Thank You! Yes!

So ... A-not-I? AD? What do we call it? LLM seems too specialised?

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world -1 points 4 weeks ago

Autocomplete on steroids, but suffering dementia.

[-] JollyG@lemmy.world -1 points 4 weeks ago

Word guessing machine.

[-] lena@gregtech.eu -1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

AS - artificial stupidity

ASS - artificial super stupidity

[-] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org -1 points 4 weeks ago

Both are good 👍

[-] mbirth@lemmy.ml -2 points 4 weeks ago

I prefer the term "sophisticated text completion".

[-] JGrffn@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago

What I never understood about this argument is.....why are we fighting over whether something that speaks like us, knows more than us, bullshits and gets shit wrong like us, loses its mind like us, seemingly sometimes seeks self-preservation like us.....why all of this isn't enough to fit the very self-explanatory term "artificial....intelligence". That name does not describe whether the entity is having a valid experiencing of the world as other living beings, it does not proclaim absolute excellence in all things done by said entity, it doesn't even really say what kind of intelligence this intelligence would be. It simply says something has an intelligence of some sort, and it's artificial. We've had AI in games for decades, it's not the sci-fi AI, but it's still code taking in multiple inputs and producing a behavior as an outcome of those inputs alongside other historical data it may or may not have. This fits LLMs perfectly. As far as I seem to understand, LLMs are essentially at least part of the algorithm we ourselves use in our brains to interpret written or spoken inputs, and produce an output. They bullshit all the time and don't know when they're lying, so what? Has nobody here run into a compulsive liar or a sociopath? People sometimes have no idea where a random factoid they're saying came from or that it's even a factoid, why is it so crazy when the machine does it?

I keep hearing the word "anthropomorphize" being thrown around a lot, as if we cant be bringing up others into our domain, all the while refusing to even consider that maybe the underlying mechanisms that make hs tick are not that special, certainly not special enough to grant us a whole degree of separation from other beings and entities, and maybe we should instead bring ourselves down to the same domain as the rest of reality. Cold hard truth is, we don't know if consciousness isn't just an emerging property of varios different large models working together to show a cohesive image. If it is, would that be so bad? Hell, we don't really even know if we actually have free will or if we live in a superdeterministic world, where every single particle moves with a predetermined path given to it since the very beginning of everything. What makes us think we're so much better than other beings, to the point where we decide whether their existence is even recognizable?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Geodad@lemmy.world -2 points 4 weeks ago

I've never been fooled by their claims of it being intelligent.

Its basically an overly complicated series of if/then statements that try to guess the next series of inputs.

[-] Flagstaff@programming.dev -2 points 4 weeks ago

ChatGPT 2 was literally an Excel spreadsheet.

I guesstimate that it's effectively a supermassive autocomplete algo that uses some TOTP-like factor to help it produce "unique" output every time.

And they're running into issues due to increasingly ingesting AI-generated data.

Get your popcorn out! 🍿

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Kiwi_fella@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago

Can we say that AI has the potential for "intelligence", just like some people do? There are clearly some very intelligent people and the world, and very clearly some that aren't.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ShotDonkey@lemmy.world -3 points 4 weeks ago

I disagree with this notion. I think it's dangerously unresponsible to only assume AI is stupid. Everyone should also assume that with a certain probabilty AI can become dangerously self aware. I revcommend everyone to read what Daniel Kokotaijlo, previous employees of OpenAI, predicts: https://ai-2027.com/

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] doodledup@lemmy.world -5 points 3 weeks ago

Humans are also LLMs.

We also speak words in succession that have a high probability of following each other. We don't say "Let's go eat a car at McDonalds" unless we're specifically instructed to say so.

What does consciousness even mean? If you can't quantify it, how can you prove humans have it and LLMs don't? Maybe consciousness is just one thought following the next, one word after the other, one neural connection determined on previous. Then we're not so different from LLMs afterall.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2025
326 points (94.3% liked)

Technology

73290 readers
1321 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS