[–] [S] 0 points 4 hours ago

Tough question. We definitely still seem to follow biological instincts, but birthrates keep falling. Some seek purpose in religion, but that is falling out of favor too. Some in their career, but if we assume "Human Zoo" scenario...

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] [S] -2 points 5 hours ago (1 child)

    It doesn’t know what red is. It doesn’t know what a dog is

    This is very philosophical, but what is understanding of something? Isn't it just relationships between different concepts? LLM currently encode information similarly in their multidimensional vector space. Where a "dog" vector would be close to "animal" "pet" "breed" etc vectors and those in turn to other similar concepts and so on. How different is it from human way of understanding?

    LLMs cannot do that. LLMs have to be retrained with data in a very specific format from the start

    Sure, that is true right now. But in not-so-distant future, it is not unreasonable to assume AI would be able to improve itself without as much (or any) human intervention. For example it could streamline training, automatically collect new data from across the world in real time. Be able to access its own weights in the model, increase improvement efficiency possibly exponentially even.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [+] [S] -10 points 5 hours ago (10 children)

    Why not? A sufficiently complex and powerful machine could simulate and mimic human brain functionality. Only difference is the change in medium where the "thinking" happens from grey matter to silicon.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    Heard some people say that a so called "Human Zoo" is one of the best-case scenarios with pseudo-omniscient AI taking care of all of us. Supposedly that comes true, to what ends would humans continue to keep a population going, simply due to biological bias? You think humans would devolve in some way, or become intellectually atrophied?