Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient

Re:Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient by srvmshr on Friday July 22, 2022 @07:41PM (#32198483)

A brilliant colleague Janelle Shane works specifically on how language models fail (obnoxiously often). This is her line of research to show how LLMs are overhyped / given more credit than should be. I think her fun little experiments will give a better answer than I ever can :). She's on substack & Twitter

https://janellecshane.substack.com/p/okay-gpt-3-candy-hearts

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient by jameshart on Friday July 22, 2022 @07:58PM (#32198632)

I don't understand how frequency of failure is a relevant concern here.

Humans are frequently monumental idiots. The human language and inference model produces nonsensical, dangerous, and stupid results with alarming frequency.

(not to say I believe language models are sentient, but... you need something more than 'sometimes they spout made up BS' to refute the claim, because it turns out that is not particularly indicative of sentience.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient by gnramires on Friday July 22, 2022 @08:03PM (#32198667)

To be fair, I didn't know what a exactly a 'candy heart message' was. I probably would have failed this particular Turing test.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient by astrange on Friday July 22, 2022 @08:40PM (#32198947)

I think it would be fair to give you Google access or at least an encyclopedia.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google fires engineer who called its AI sentient by rootw0rm on Friday July 22, 2022 @07:52PM (#32198581)

+1 for SHRUBBERY'S PRECIOUS

if anything, this proves that candy hearts should be larger, and less disgusting

[ Parent | on HN ]