We are constantly fed a version of AI that looks, sounds and acts suspiciously like us. It speaks in polished sentences, mimics emotions, expresses curiosity, claims to feel compassion, even dabbles in what it calls creativity.

But what we call AI today is nothing more than a statistical machine: a digital parrot regurgitating patterns mined from oceans of human data (the situation hasn’t changed much since it was discussed here five years ago). When it writes an answer to a question, it literally just guesses which letter and word will come next in a sequence – based on the data it’s been trained on.

This means AI has no understanding. No consciousness. No knowledge in any real, human sense. Just pure probability-driven, engineered brilliance — nothing more, and nothing less.

So why is a real “thinking” AI likely impossible? Because it’s bodiless. It has no senses, no flesh, no nerves, no pain, no pleasure. It doesn’t hunger, desire or fear. And because there is no cognition — not a shred — there’s a fundamental gap between the data it consumes (data born out of human feelings and experience) and what it can do with them.

Philosopher David Chalmers calls the mysterious mechanism underlying the relationship between our physical body and consciousness the “hard problem of consciousness”. Eminent scientists have recently hypothesised that consciousness actually emerges from the integration of internal, mental states with sensory representations (such as changes in heart rate, sweating and much more).

Given the paramount importance of the human senses and emotion for consciousness to “happen”, there is a profound and probably irreconcilable disconnect between general AI, the machine, and consciousness, a human phenomenon.

https://archive.ph/Fapar

        • El Barto
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s irrelevant. That’s like saying you shouldn’t complain about someone running a red light if you stopped in time before they t-boned you - because you understood the situation.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Are you really comparing my repsonse to the tone when correcting minor grammatical errors to someone brushing off nearly killing someone right now?

            • El Barto
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              That’s a red herring, bro. It’s an analogy. You know that.

    • JcbAzPx
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      So you trust your slm more than your fellow humans?

      • mechoman444
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ya of course I do. Humans are the most unreliable slick disgusting diseased morally inept living organisms on the planet.

        • JcbAzPx
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          And they made the programs you seem to trust so much.

          • mechoman444
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Ya… Humans so far have made everything not produced by Nature on Earth. 🤷

            • JcbAzPx
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              So trusting tech made by them is trusting them. Specifically, a less reliable version of them.