Artificial-intelligence systems such as large language models (LLMs) can exhibit behaviour that seems strikingly intelligent. This has led many people, including some experts, to wonder whether these systems could have some form of consciousness — the capacity for subjective experience. However, we think that existing AI systems are not conscious, and that, along current trajectories of development, they are not likely to become conscious. Greater clarity about whether AI could become consciousness will be crucial as society grapples with the challenges posed by this increasingly powerful technology.

  • Zen_Shinobi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    You’re right, material matters. If it’s not a biological organism with cell/s, it’s not sentiant or intelligent.

    If humans just disapeared right now, ai would sit and do nothing. It wouldn’t “take over” or “break out” it would sit idle until a human (well I guess another living organism was capable of using keyboards and mouse) interacted with it.

    All those elements you listed plus all from the periodic table of elements do not define a living, intelligent, sentiant organism. If they did, soil and cow paddies would be living.

    I highly recommend going back to middle school science class again.

    • GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      20 minutes ago

      So if soil and cow patties aren’t sentient, yet people are, you’re acknowledging that the substrate doesn’t determine the capability, but more how it’s arranged?

      Until the Wright brothers came along, most people thought heavier-than-air powered flight wasn’t possible. Less than 70 years later, people were walking on the moon. 4 million years ago, there wasn’t anything capable of building either of those things, even though there is good evidence creatures back then had creativity, dreams, and ingenuity. Assuming things can’t advance further is either hubris or abject ignorance.

    • BJW@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      31 minutes ago

      That’s an arbitrary distinction, and a short-sighted one in my humble opinion.

      That depends entirely on whether there are any AI currently configured to self-learn, have asynchronous processing, and continual real-time input. Certainly not ChatGPT nor Claude will be self sufficient, but that’s only what is available for the public to interact with.

      No, you missed the point entirely. Intelligence does not derive from the material - at all. It comes from the structure the material is in.