What it really boils down to is "the machine doesn't have a soul". Just an unfalsifiable and ultimately meaningless objection.

▲

gitremote 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Incorrect. Vertebrate animal brains update their neural connections when interacting with the environment. LLMs don't do that. Their model weights are frozen for every release.

	▲	pizza 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		But why can’t I then just say, actually, you need to relocate the analogy components; activations are their neural connections, the text is their environment, the weights are fixed just like our DNA is, etc.
	▲	lupusreal a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		As I understand it, octopuses have their reasoning and intelligence essentially baked into them at birth, shaped by evolution, and do relatively little learning during life because their lives are so short. Very intelligent, obviously, but very unlike people.

▲

skissane 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe panpsychism is true and the machine actually does have a soul, because all machines have souls, even your lawnmower. But possibly the soul of a machine running a frontier AI is a bit closer to a human soul than your lawnmower’s soul is.

	▲	sfink 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		By that logic, Larry Ellison would have a soul. You've disproven panpsychism! Congratulations!

▲

tonkinai 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe the soul is not as mysterios as we think it is?

	▲	lupusreal 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		There is no empirical test for souls.