Republishing an old essay in light of current news on Bing's AI: "Regarding Blake Lemoine's claim that LaMDA is 'sentient', he might be right (sorta), but perhaps not for the reasons he thinks"
Republishing an old essay in light of current news on Bing's AI: "Regarding Blake Lemoine's claim that LaMDA is 'sentient', he might be right (sorta), but perhaps not for the reasons he thinks"
Turning your argument around, you actually seem to be saying that since a simple architecture is enough to convincingly simulate persons, perhaps personhood is much less complicated than is usually believed. For instance, people might consist of heaps of small/simple personas, and when we simulate someone we are actually simulating a persona relevant to the application we have in mind, such as someone's often-used mannerisms, or their stance on a particular question that we are thinking about. Is this in accord with your thoughts?
Turning your argument around, you actually seem to be saying that since a simple architecture is enough to convincingly simulate persons, perhaps personhood is much less complicated than is usually believed. For instance, people might consist of heaps of small/simple personas, and when we simulate someone we are actually simulating a persona relevant to the application we have in mind, such as someone's often-used mannerisms, or their stance on a particular question that we are thinking about. Is this in accord with your thoughts?