News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:LaMDA is not sentient by mdp2021 on Monday June 13, 2022 @04:09PM (#31731107)
> the silly little monkey brains we have

...are those things that with a trained prefrontal become the wise respectable dignified brains some have. And they may come to different conclusions (they do).

Put it this way (to give your idea credit): the more intellectual sophistication there will be around, the less the suspect the one who treats scarecrows and mannequins «like a person ... even if we know it’s not», or thanks an 'address:port' type server for service, is confused.

Back to the point though: if one called sentient what is not out of being «sympathetic», there would be a factual mistake, which is not justifiable, and which has to be fought by training people to see things as they are. Mistakes have a very high social cost.

Re:LaMDA is not sentient by vineyardmike on Monday June 13, 2022 @07:27PM (#31732996)
Nah let’s not pretend it’s an intelligence thing. It’s not.

Saying thanks to Alexa even when you know she’s not a person is not a sign of (lack of) intelligence. It’s a sign of manners. Don’t pat yourself on the back and say you’re intelligent because you express good manners less often than the next person.

While I think it’s a bit silly that the researcher thought the chat bot was sentient, I don’t think it’s silly that the bot is perceived sufficiently human to be worth of manners if Alexa has been there for almost a decade.

I don’t think we should teach people that bots are explicitly not worth a level of manners even at the cost of a strange life-like sympathy some may develop. It took us hundreds of years to teach people that human slavery was wrong and we should treat actual people with respect - and many are still pretty bad at it. Frankly society needs all the practice it can get.

Society makes a ton of “factual mistakes”. Look at all of religion, most of politics, a huge amount of history books, much of lower-grade science education. It’s all full of “factual mistakes” that, today, probably have higher social costs than someone being nice to a robot.

What would “training” even look like? Mandatory bot-sympathizing “reeducation” classes in elementary school? We couldn’t even teach people vaccines were safe and worth getting during a pandemic, but we’re going to trying to tell people not be be nice to human-like things? I can’t imagine how high the social costs to that will be.

Re:LaMDA is not sentient by mdp2021 on Tuesday June 14, 2022 @04:10AM (#31736086)
Education does not work that way: it is not any shallow programming of reactions, but enabling in the individual a deep growth.

That depth is absolutely crucial in a society.

And your examples are staggeringly tied with contexts in which superficiality is the crucial factor for not seeing the matter nor the issues around the matter.