Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
rocmcd | on: Through Captain Jean-Luc Picard, Patrick Stewart taught us the measure of a man
Self-awareness and consciousness would be hard to make a case for. Those terms are themselves fuzzy, but I have not heard a compelling case that would make it obvious LLMs have those traits.
Lerc | parent | next
Picard addresses that when he asks for proof that he, himself is conscious.

It is a hard case to make, but if we can't make a compelling case for ourselves should we be requiring it to be made for others.

loading story #50312206
| parent | next
{"deleted":true,"id":50314311,"parent":50310830,"time":1793437396,"type":"comment"}
keeganpoppen | parent | next
are we even sure that self-awareness and consciousness are distinct? I do agree that from the PoV of "do LLMs demonstrate/exemplify consciousness", it is a difficult case without appealing to emotion (like is done in the clip, fwiw). for me, personally, that emotional appeal is sufficient, but that is because for whatever reason I'm willing to write puts on how this LLM stuff pans out and sell them to anyone, anywhere, anytime. But that is a reaction to consensus, not to my own certitude.
avadodin | root | parent | next
For self-awareness to automatically result in consciousness, consciousness would have to permeate existence itself.

An LLM —if self-aware— is conscious even if run by a Chinese man in a room with a deck of cards.

Of course, even if we happened to find a modem to the Holy Spirit dimension in our brains as an alternative hypothesis, it wouldn't necessarily rule out emergent consciousness. It could be conscious just not as we are.

I think a weaker version of the philosophical zombie thought experiment would trend towards treating the premise of pan-consciousness as true.

Lerc | root | parent
In the trial scene Data reporting that he was ware that he was in a hearing to determine his status is presented as an argument for self awareness. but I think some might find that debatable because it is just Data saying words based upon the situation. The question then becomes is being able to accurately report a situation proof of self-awareness. If it is not self-awareness, then what is it? I can imagine a clearly non-conscious entity being able to accurately report its circumstances if the reporting were a simple subset of possibilities. A simple mechanical device with a detector that says "I am on the table" and "I am on the floor" could do that. There would definitely be a sense in which you could say that it's detection mechanism made it aware of where it was. The self part is harder, because it wouldn't know what kind of thing it is a thing at all. Is the ability to assert it is a thing meaningful? Nothing can be asserted at all if it is not a thing. Does something need to know that you have to exist to consider if you exist? Is that is what is required?

This is a difficult field. Any simple answer you hear will almost certainly be wrong.

loading story #50312697
mapontosevenths | parent
> Self-awareness and consciousness

I will make a case for both, after you define them in a way that doesn't also exclude many humans (including the neurodivergent or those with amnesia) or turn into self-referential nonsense like "conscious == human, therefore machine !== conscious."

In the meantime, we have a simple choice between two risks: Would you rather accidentally show kindness and empathy to a thing that may or may not have "deserved" it, or risk atrocities that will leave future generations as disgusted by you as we are of the slavers of old.

I will choose to be decent. It's free, and even if the cost were high the cost of evil is higher.

loading story #50311935
loading story #50311931
loading story #50311958