| ▲ | mjg2 11 days ago | |||||||
Roger that, thank you. w/r/g your recapitulation of my point: yes, the story is unoriginal and pointless, and the HN community seems to eat it up-- isn't that odd. So I still disagree with your elucidated point (as you end with "which is valid"): the OP author is using prior art fiction to bolster their opinion of LLM-based software tools as being a possible vector of sentience, not to disarm our chauvinism like the original author intended. If OP wanted to make that point, they could have written a critical essay instead of farming out their thoughts as tokens. But still, I look forward to reading the book you suggested to understand and appreciate your perspective more. | ||||||||
| ▲ | simpaticoder 11 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
The point is valid regardless of whether you judge LLM to be sentient or not, because the point is to say "don't let your prejudice about substrate bias your decision". Or in other words, if you're going to weigh something don't tip the scale. This is good advice whatever the outcome of the measurement. Blindsight is a remarkable book - I hope you enjoy it! | ||||||||
| ||||||||