I've been convinced it's a fundamental aspect of intelligence for years. It's just much harder to build than LLMs so companies didn't try hard enough even if they were equally convinced.
And the interaction via the senses and mobility with a universe of things; some predictable in their behavior, some not. All LLM knowledge is second hand, except for its miniscule intake of information coming from the human prompting it. No wonder it gets sycophantic with us. Our input is a rare treasure.
“which exist in equal measure”: this is something that remains unproven, precisely because we do not know the ultimate nature of either reality. Hence the allure of those who claim that one will prevail over the other—or that one will remain forever impenetrable to the other.”
One basic assumption leading us astray is ascribing individuality to ChatGPT (and other LLMs). It is not a he, or a she, or even an ‘it’. Interacting with AI is interacting with very loosely connected iterations of a set of algorithms. Like visiting different shops at a mall: the meaning is in the shops, not the mall
Increasingly, I think that embodiment is everything.
I've been convinced it's a fundamental aspect of intelligence for years. It's just much harder to build than LLMs so companies didn't try hard enough even if they were equally convinced.
Totally agree. The human body, mind, and its fascinating interaction remains the most impressive hardware and software out there.
And the interaction via the senses and mobility with a universe of things; some predictable in their behavior, some not. All LLM knowledge is second hand, except for its miniscule intake of information coming from the human prompting it. No wonder it gets sycophantic with us. Our input is a rare treasure.
"Our input is a rare treasure." Awesome
“which exist in equal measure”: this is something that remains unproven, precisely because we do not know the ultimate nature of either reality. Hence the allure of those who claim that one will prevail over the other—or that one will remain forever impenetrable to the other.”
Agreed, it's a literary device more than anything
Sounds like Michel Foucault’s epistemes.
Have a look at this:
https://ivanthrone.substack.com/p/dark-sonnet-payload
One basic assumption leading us astray is ascribing individuality to ChatGPT (and other LLMs). It is not a he, or a she, or even an ‘it’. Interacting with AI is interacting with very loosely connected iterations of a set of algorithms. Like visiting different shops at a mall: the meaning is in the shops, not the mall