“MY friends and family are of course sapient, but all of those morons I see on TV and sometimes have to go to meetings with, those are dumber than ChatGPT obviously“ honey do you hear yourself
if you think about selection bias, namely that one normally chooses to surround oneself with like-minded people and if you add the fact that people would normally not consider themselves non-sapient, it sort of makes sense though, dunnit?
family, true, you don’t choose that, but I figure statistically people are more likely to have some strong feelings about their family and implications towards themselves if they admit their family is indeed non-sapient (though blood ties are a different topic, best left undisturbed in this context)
for the record I never said MY friends and family, I was instructing the other commenter to look beyond their own circle. I figured since they were so convinced that the average human was not, in fact, about as dumb as an LLM, their social circle skews their statistics a bit.
human beings are smart. bad things don’t happen because people are stupid. this kind of thinking is deshumanising and leads to so much evil in our world. people are not LLMs. they’re people like you. they have thoughts. they act for reasons. don’t dehumanise them.
I would point you to Hanlon’s razor for the first part there.
it’s not about dehumanizing, it’s merely comparing the outputs. it doesn’t really matter if they act for reasons or have thoughts if the output is the same. should we be more forgiving if a LLM outputs crap because it’s just a tool or should we be more forgiving if the human outputs the exact same crap, because it’s a person?
and, just for fun, to bring solipsism into this, how do we actually know that they have thoughts?
Wow, it’s not like many centuries have been spent with fields of philosophy investigating what cognition and consciousness are, good thing we have a bunch of also-ran STEM dweebs to reinvent philosophy of mind from the first principle of “Idiocracy was a documentary.”
I cannot upvote this enough. There are no human NPCs.
Also, there are people in my social circle who are developmentally disabled and they are also sapient, what the actual fuck.
A computed can multiply matrices and most humans can’t, that doesn’t mean an algorithm is more sapient than a human. A tinker toy computer can reliably win or tie tic-tac-toe, and it’s not more sapient than a developmentally disabled human who can’t.
ummm, you’re the only one here that made any assumption about the sapience of developmentally disabled people, no idea where or why that came from
I would expect the people in your social circle to be sapient according to yourself, please see my initial point about selecting the ones you surround yourself with
tic-tac-toe is a solved game, so it would be expected for a computer to always win or tie, that says more about the game itself though
shit, find me the stupidest dog you know and i’ll show a being that is leagues beyond a fucking chatbot’s capabilities. it can want things in the world, and it can act of its own volition to obtain those things. a chatbot is nothing. it’s noise. fuck that. if you can’t see it it’s because you don’t know to look at the world.
“MY friends and family are of course sapient, but all of those morons I see on TV and sometimes have to go to meetings with, those are dumber than ChatGPT obviously“ honey do you hear yourself
if you think about selection bias, namely that one normally chooses to surround oneself with like-minded people and if you add the fact that people would normally not consider themselves non-sapient, it sort of makes sense though, dunnit?
family, true, you don’t choose that, but I figure statistically people are more likely to have some strong feelings about their family and implications towards themselves if they admit their family is indeed non-sapient (though blood ties are a different topic, best left undisturbed in this context)
for the record I never said MY friends and family, I was instructing the other commenter to look beyond their own circle. I figured since they were so convinced that the average human was not, in fact, about as dumb as an LLM, their social circle skews their statistics a bit.
human beings are smart. bad things don’t happen because people are stupid. this kind of thinking is deshumanising and leads to so much evil in our world. people are not LLMs. they’re people like you. they have thoughts. they act for reasons. don’t dehumanise them.
I would point you to Hanlon’s razor for the first part there.
it’s not about dehumanizing, it’s merely comparing the outputs. it doesn’t really matter if they act for reasons or have thoughts if the output is the same. should we be more forgiving if a LLM outputs crap because it’s just a tool or should we be more forgiving if the human outputs the exact same crap, because it’s a person?
and, just for fun, to bring solipsism into this, how do we actually know that they have thoughts?
how old are you
is this the post where the flaming starts then?
no i just wanted to know before calling you a hitler. maybe you can still grow and save yourself.
waaait… are you a LLM? have I been arguing with ChatGPT this whole time? good one, whomever pulled this!
Wow, it’s not like many centuries have been spent with fields of philosophy investigating what cognition and consciousness are, good thing we have a bunch of also-ran STEM dweebs to reinvent philosophy of mind from the first principle of “Idiocracy was a documentary.”
I cannot upvote this enough. There are no human NPCs.
Also, there are people in my social circle who are developmentally disabled and they are also sapient, what the actual fuck.
A computed can multiply matrices and most humans can’t, that doesn’t mean an algorithm is more sapient than a human. A tinker toy computer can reliably win or tie tic-tac-toe, and it’s not more sapient than a developmentally disabled human who can’t.
ummm, you’re the only one here that made any assumption about the sapience of developmentally disabled people, no idea where or why that came from
I would expect the people in your social circle to be sapient according to yourself, please see my initial point about selecting the ones you surround yourself with
tic-tac-toe is a solved game, so it would be expected for a computer to always win or tie, that says more about the game itself though
You defined sapience as capacity for reasoning you absolute clown.
are you saying developmentally disabled people are incapable of reasoning? that’s a bit rude of you…
oh do fuck off
that didn’t take long
shit, find me the stupidest dog you know and i’ll show a being that is leagues beyond a fucking chatbot’s capabilities. it can want things in the world, and it can act of its own volition to obtain those things. a chatbot is nothing. it’s noise. fuck that. if you can’t see it it’s because you don’t know to look at the world.