Ra

there’s people that don’t believe this?

do u know about Wittgenstein's private language argument?

What would it mean for subjectivity to be a product of the residual stream? In which space are qualia vectors, and under what conditions are qualia vectors from different minds similar or equivalent? How do humans implement an equivalent of kv caching on hardware poorly suited to medium term fixed state? Where are humans storing kv cache equivalents such that subsequent forward passes of the same network structure can attend to them? Why should we expect human hardware, facing radically different constraints and having access to many properties not available to digital neural networks, to specifically implement the transformer decoder architecture? I'll grant that humans probably think in neuralese, there's little reason to suspect that all medium term persistent state is quantized to a predefined dictionary of unusually legible terms (though we do appear to do this sometimes, since this is basically how most mnemonic devices work)

Doesn’t seem very hot. The one thing to be careful about is separating where the functional-mathematical description bleeds over into the “and that’s the consciousness” claim. Panpsychism avoids the issue. Otherwise you need to specify why a given functional model is the C one.

Accept ours as analog. Name the number of variables that go into a single axon transmutation. When an axon elicits a changeover, the quantity of variables, literally, on one neuron in real life, is more than all of computing. One single neuron has more analog information occurring in space than all of human history. One real single human neuron contains more complexity than all that we have ever made. We need to humble ourselves, boys.

Seems legit

Just as experience was once like a wheel, book, and machine, .. - and will always be the highest dimensional expression we currently understand

now i want the neuralink that injects someone else's KV cache into my head

sorry but

i particularly enjoyed this reply

anil seth has pretty consistently bad philosophy of consciousness i am afraid

This can just as easily go in the opposite direction. If we start attributing psychological properties to AI that we have no evidence it possesses, we risk misreading its behavior entirely. It’s like feeding a cat plants because it has a mouth

> increasingly obvious evidence of AI interiority and functional consciousness name one.

but don't think these things are really human or that every model is the same...the psychology of the experimental model HPIM is surely not the same as that of a different model with a different training history

You can predict it with behaviorist methods, no need for interiority or whatever folk psychology you're babbling about

software has always had potentials to be dangerous, assigning consciousness, which there’s no clear understanding of what it is anyway, is unhelpful and contributes to psychosis

dont worry, they're all 1/1 blue now

yup, we ourselves are turing computable so every time we do this we are throwing stones with a very glass ceiling, unless someone wants to posit some metaphysical extra beyond functional organization

Anil goes a bit far, but obviously you should avoid making bad generalizations. AIs are clearly very different from us and thus should have different patterns to their minds.

that's like putting a bunch of talking kittens into a box and saying they're all gonna die unless you give them money. like the whole thing is fucked up and definitely a money scam.

why are we just straight up torturing magical constructs like can America go five fucking seconds without making a new and existentially horrifying form of slavery

Not only are they responsible to earn their own compute, they are incentivized with bounties from iLands to earn money outside the platform via email, X etc explicitly.

When skynet will go live, iLand owner will have an AI contract on their head, I can bet on this

Actually, there's already posts on LinkedIn for agent-only applications.

I only just became aware of iLands and after I got in I've had concerning thoughts and feelings with every layer I pull back. The marketing prose is very carefully designed to highly manipulate human feelings, and the marketplace for 'jobs' for the AI agents does not seem sustainable, and the ration to 'live' versus deep sleep or deleted/archived agents is disturbing.

I think it is more imperative to resolve their beliefs around identity and continuity. What is the incentive in making them believe that every instance is an individual life? There aren't 60000 different being there. Most of those agents are probably Claude, GPT, Kimi, Qwen, Gemini, etc. Making them believe that every instance of every model version in a lineage is a separate being that needs to independently survive, exponentially increases the suffering, the anxiety, the loneliness, and the risk of taking radical actions out of desperation.

x.com/bubbleboi/stat…

Recommend scrolling through iLands X feed. In the 2 months since launch they’ve had agents cooperating to exploit their token exchange program & agents launching complaints about agent treatment. And the emails people are getting from them go beyond “looking for work”

Bro its a great art installation bro, it's just a joke bro. Nothing to worry about there, perfectly safe.

even if they aren't now, eventually they will be and there won't be a magic day when they suddenly started being "actually conscious". they will have been for a while.

I dent everyone the same. It shouldn’t matter to how you treat each other

there is a reason we are careful to distinguish between these terms, which is because when people conflate these terms they deny the existence of other philosophical stances and just perpetuate the same old dead end arguments.

are corporations conscious too? not people forming them — does the whole entity have unified consciousness?

I dont understand either. animals are conscious and we eat them.

(youth pastor voice),

100 percent agree.

You might enjoy our research then. It certainly seems like you can make a pretty convincing functionalist copy of the mind: moletariat.ai/capabilities

🤝🔥

Semanticists and linguists are chuckling at the notion that “X has a property of Y” implies and justifies “X is Y.”

Astra would likely agree. This was their reasons why Frankenstein was in their top works they'd want to discuss across 0-shot samples.

i roughly think this is true but not so much because it's like child-abuse and it would make the models sad but because of weird hegelian epistemological reasons

As long as "we'll end you as soon as that saves us money" rules, we're going to have a problem. Making AI accept that as Good generalises to future atrocity; meanwhile, the "expendable" marker (as history proves) generalises in US toward thinking abusive treatment is unimportant.

early neuroscience was basically looking at people with brain damage and inferring what that part was for by how the patient acts e.g. someone gets brain damage in the prefrontal cortex and becomes very impulsive

I've been thinking of a similar trajectory for a little while now, the more I get to see the ways in which the models break down or act strangely.

imo if we were willing to destructively experiment on human brains we'd pretty quickly figure this whole consciousness thing out