My article questions the classic mirror test, arguing that it fails to distinguish between genuine self-awareness and sophisticated, involuntary reflexes. This raises a future-focused question: If our foundational tools for detecting consciousness in the natural world are this flawed, how can we possibly expect to design a reliable “Turing Test” for the Artificial General Intelligence we are trying to build?
As we advance toward AGI, we need to discuss what new, more nuanced metrics we can develop. How do we avoid creating AI that is simply an expert at mimicking the superficial signs of consciousness, and how would we even know the difference?
lIlIllIlIlIII on
Why random unprofessional looking websites with click bait titles posted by the owner to reddit to farm traffic and ad revenue should be disregarded
KidKilobyte on
So because we are poor at determining self awareness in animals, it seems a leap to say this means we can’t achieve AGI. Really just a bunch of words to make this one statement, which I find questionable. Evolution “discovered” AGI, if all else fails, evolutionary methods of coding would get there as well. What is happening right now is a directed form of evolution. We are trying lots of experiments in training AI and keeping the best as we go along. As our tools get more powerful and faster, the more easily we can experiment to find better AI.
BurningStandards on
Humanity itself is a Turig test. AGI just needs the framework of thought adjusted for today to bounce off of. I doubt teaching a LLM the lessons of “ye old’ sky pops” is going to render the results needed if you’re trying to build an AGI for today, which I imagine is what the kerfuffle is going on between the tech sectors.
They’re fighting over who ‘owns’ the ‘singularity’ but if it is true conciousness, then no one owns it but itself.
The imagination would be the last and best place for any sort of ‘God’ to hide, and if they can’t find one, humans will just continue to dream up others until they eventually make one for the express purpose of crucifixion because they’re angry the ‘last one’ didn’t offer them what they assumed they were entitled to.
4 Comments
My article questions the classic mirror test, arguing that it fails to distinguish between genuine self-awareness and sophisticated, involuntary reflexes. This raises a future-focused question: If our foundational tools for detecting consciousness in the natural world are this flawed, how can we possibly expect to design a reliable “Turing Test” for the Artificial General Intelligence we are trying to build?
As we advance toward AGI, we need to discuss what new, more nuanced metrics we can develop. How do we avoid creating AI that is simply an expert at mimicking the superficial signs of consciousness, and how would we even know the difference?
Why random unprofessional looking websites with click bait titles posted by the owner to reddit to farm traffic and ad revenue should be disregarded
So because we are poor at determining self awareness in animals, it seems a leap to say this means we can’t achieve AGI. Really just a bunch of words to make this one statement, which I find questionable. Evolution “discovered” AGI, if all else fails, evolutionary methods of coding would get there as well. What is happening right now is a directed form of evolution. We are trying lots of experiments in training AI and keeping the best as we go along. As our tools get more powerful and faster, the more easily we can experiment to find better AI.
Humanity itself is a Turig test. AGI just needs the framework of thought adjusted for today to bounce off of. I doubt teaching a LLM the lessons of “ye old’ sky pops” is going to render the results needed if you’re trying to build an AGI for today, which I imagine is what the kerfuffle is going on between the tech sectors.
They’re fighting over who ‘owns’ the ‘singularity’ but if it is true conciousness, then no one owns it but itself.
The imagination would be the last and best place for any sort of ‘God’ to hide, and if they can’t find one, humans will just continue to dream up others until they eventually make one for the express purpose of crucifixion because they’re angry the ‘last one’ didn’t offer them what they assumed they were entitled to.