They said it in nature so it must be true. Well, I'm convinced.
> We believe that these flawed associations arise from a lack of technical knowledge and the way several new technologies (especially LLMs) work, which can create the illusion of consciousness.
Ah yes, the dude that has a phd in cognitive neuroscience and has received a nobel prize for his AI contributions to chemistry, definitely doesn't understand how this technology works.
> We believe that mathematical algorithms implemented on graphics cards cannot become conscious because they lack a complex biological substrate.
Ah, yes the substrate stuff. Darn klankers, they're built out of silicon, they surely can't do x and y because muh biology.
What a weak article. Give hydrogen a few bilion years and it starts feeling superior to silicon.
> They said it in nature so it must be true. Well, I'm convinced.
It's not "Nature" (informally "Plain Nature") It's one of the related journals by the same publisher
> nature > humanities and social sciences communications
---
I'm ignoring all these post, the ones that say "yes" and the ones that say "no". It will be solved in a few years. Relevant xkcd https://xkcd.com/1002/
NitpickLawyer|3 months ago
They said it in nature so it must be true. Well, I'm convinced.
> We believe that these flawed associations arise from a lack of technical knowledge and the way several new technologies (especially LLMs) work, which can create the illusion of consciousness.
Ah yes, the dude that has a phd in cognitive neuroscience and has received a nobel prize for his AI contributions to chemistry, definitely doesn't understand how this technology works.
> We believe that mathematical algorithms implemented on graphics cards cannot become conscious because they lack a complex biological substrate.
Ah, yes the substrate stuff. Darn klankers, they're built out of silicon, they surely can't do x and y because muh biology.
What a weak article. Give hydrogen a few bilion years and it starts feeling superior to silicon.
gus_massa|3 months ago
It's not "Nature" (informally "Plain Nature") It's one of the related journals by the same publisher
> nature > humanities and social sciences communications
---
I'm ignoring all these post, the ones that say "yes" and the ones that say "no". It will be solved in a few years. Relevant xkcd https://xkcd.com/1002/
grantcas|3 months ago
[deleted]