Re:LaMDA is not sentient
by cuuupid on Monday June 13, 2022 @02:25AM
(#31721915)
Technically speaking isn't this blasphemy? If he's saying that the A.I. his division helped create was a soulful child, then he's basically claiming that the researchers in his division (and maybe even himself) are all gods, which is a form of blasphemy?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:LaMDA is not sentient
by upwardbound on Monday June 13, 2022 @02:28AM
(#31721937)
I don't agree with his views but I'd guess he'd say that the researchers created it in the same sense that parents create a child - following a template that was made possible in advance by God's design, which humans only discovered but didn't invent - like we discovered but didn't invent the number Pi.
So creating the AI was manifest destiny, just like Europeans "discovered but didn't invent" North America. Actually I think that analogy works a little too well...
Only insofar that the act of building a car could be considered blasphemy.
Theologically (at least among the framework of Judeo-Christian beliefs), a “god” would require omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence. Using tools provided by a god, within their own framework is not godly; no matter how advanced they may seem. Altering the fabric of that framework would be.
That being said, the creator of the AI might certainly be seen as a god from their perspective.
If it were the middle ages that'd be a valid concern.