Remix.run Logo
semiquaver 5 hours ago

Yeah, and you’re just a next-word-sayer.

ofjcihen 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I love this argument. Not because it’s true but because it betrays the posters doubt in their own sentience.

matheusmoreira 4 hours ago | parent [-]

It's impossible for someone to doubt their own sentience. The literal act of doubting is enough to dissipate all doubt. Solipsism is essentially the one certainty that every mind out there has.

Doubting the sentience of machines and even other humans is perfectly fine though. Only empathy allows people to make the leap and assume other humans have souls.

rexarex 2 hours ago | parent [-]

So you posit that humans are solipsistic by default, but some (most?) develop more and realize they’re not the only conscious being out there?

root_axis 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is wrong. Human thinking and speech isn't autoregressive like LLM inference.

semiquaver a minute ago | parent | next [-]

It’s not wrong that OP is a next-word-sayer. You object to my implied comparison but the fact remains that all humans are clearly next-word-sayers. We’ve all got to produce our output one element at a time.

infinite_spin 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

while the how is different, the what has many parallels. E.g. both the brain and LLMs appear to learn distributions of representations, they both develop a hierarchy of those representations, both have early layers that process simple features, with later ones processing more abstract concepts, both predict missing information...

root_axis 24 minutes ago | parent [-]

The post I responded to stated that the commenter was just a next-word-sayer, but that's wrong. The similarities you draw aren't really relevant to my reply.

semiquaver 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you not say your words one-at-a-time like everyone else? Otherwise I can’t see how my comment is “wrong”

tuvix 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Even if you could understand human cognition to the level required to say, confidently, that it’s done one word at a time, it’s likely not! Natural language is not a prerequisite for human intelligence, as evidenced by the fact that we went from primates to commenting on HN.

Natural language is, however, a prerequisite for the existence of LLMs. It’s more similar to methods for storing and retrieving information, like the printing press or a database, than it is to a sentient being.

That’s not to say that LLMs can’t do crazy things, because they already have. Our language can encode a whole lot of information, and it’s incredible that we’ve found a way to distill that so effectively.

skeptic_ai 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

Deepseek zero didn’t mix up all languages in something very efficient?

root_axis 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Do you not say your words one-at-a-time like everyone else

You're conflating being autoregressive with being sequential.

2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
artisin 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Only one word at a time!?! It's time you embrace the way of the diffusion model and hazily refine your entire thought until it's coherent.