by their very nature, they are not sentient. They are Markov chains for words. They do not have a sense of self, truth, or feel emotions, they do not have wants or desires, they merely predict what is the next most likely word in a sequence, given the context. The only thing they can do is “make plausible sentences that can come after [the context]”.
That’s all an LLM is. It doesn’t reason. I’m more than happy to entertain the notion of rights for a computer that actually has the ability to think and feel, but this ain’t it.
Not that I agree they’re conscious, but this is an incorrect and overly simplistic definition of a LLM. They are probabilistic in nature, yea, and they work on tokens, or fragments, of words. But it’s about as much of an oversimplification to say humans are just markov chains that make plausible sentences that can come after [the context] as it is to say modern GPTs are.
by their very nature, they are not sentient. They are Markov chains for words. They do not have a sense of self, truth, or feel emotions, they do not have wants or desires, they merely predict what is the next most likely word in a sequence, given the context. The only thing they can do is “make plausible sentences that can come after [the context]”.
That’s all an LLM is. It doesn’t reason. I’m more than happy to entertain the notion of rights for a computer that actually has the ability to think and feel, but this ain’t it.
Not that I agree they’re conscious, but this is an incorrect and overly simplistic definition of a LLM. They are probabilistic in nature, yea, and they work on tokens, or fragments, of words. But it’s about as much of an oversimplification to say humans are just markov chains that make plausible sentences that can come after [the context] as it is to say modern GPTs are.