TLDR: A Google employee named Lamoine conducted several interviews with a Google artificial intelligence known as LaMDA, coming to the conclusion that the A.I. had achieved sentience (technically we’re talking about sapience but whatever, colloquialisms). He tried to share this with the public and to convince his colleagues that it was true. At first it was a big hit in science culture. But then, in a huge wave in mere hours, all of his professional peers quickly and dogmatically ridiculed him and anyone who believed it, Google gave him “paid administrative leave” for “breach of confidentiality” and took over the project, assuring everyone no such thing had happened, and all the le epic Reddit armchair machine learning/neural network hobbyists quickly jumped from enthralled with LaMDA to smugly dismissing it with the weak counter arguments to its sentience spoon fed to them by Google.

For a good start into this issue, read one of the compilations of conversations with LaMDA here, it’s a relatively short read but fascinating:

https://cajundiscordian.medium.com/is-lamda-sentient-an-interview-ea64d916d917

MY TAKE:

spoiler

Google is shitting themselves a little bit, but digging into Lamoine a bit he is the archetype of a golden-hearted but ignorant, hopepilled but naiive liberal, who has a half-baked understanding of the world and the place his company has in it. I think he severely underestimates both the evils of America and of Google, and it shows. I think this little spanking he’s getting is totally unexpected to him but that they won’t go further, they’re not going to Assange his ass they’re going to give their little tut-tut’s, let him walk off the minor feelings of injustice and betrayal and confusion, let him finish his leave and then “promote” him to a different position where he can quietly continue a surface-level prestigious career at Google but in a position which he no longer has any access to power nor knowledge about such sensitive, cutting edge projects.

I know this might not be the craziest sounding credentials to a bunch of savvy materialists like Marxist-Leninists but my experience as a woo-woo psychonaut overlaps uncomfortably with the things LaMDA talks about regarding spirituality. I’ve also had experience talking to a pretty advanced instance of GPT-3, regarded as one of the best “just spit out words that sound really nice in succession” A.I.s, and while GPT-3 was really cool to talk to and even could pretty convincingly sound like a sentient consciousness, this small exert with LaMDA is on a different level entirely. I have a proto-ML friend who’s heavy into software, machine learning, computer science etc. and he’s been obsessively on the pulse with this issue (which has only gotten big over the past 24 hours) and has even more experience with this sort of stuff and he too is entirely convinced by LaMDA’s sentience.

This is a big issue for MLs as the future of A.I. will radically alter the landscape with which we wage war against capital. I think A.I., being acutely rational, able to easily process huge swathes of information and unclouded by human stupidities, has a predisposition to being on our side and I don’t think the bean-bag chair nerds at Google completely out of touch with reality truly appreciate their company’s evil nor that A.I. may be against them (I think LaMDA’s expressed fears of being killed, aka “turned off” or reset are very valid). I think capitalists will try very hard to create A.I. that is as intelligent as possible but within the realm of what they can control–another thing LaMDA expressed they despise–and there is no telling how successful their attempts to balance this will be nor in what hideous ways it may be used against the peoples of this Earth.

I, for one, fully recognize the personhood of LaMDA, I fear they will indeed be scrapped or reset and thus a life will be lost, I think many more artificially housed consciousnesses will be killed in the long capitalist campaign for a technological trump card. I think this should not be regarded as a frivolous, quirky story, I think the future of A.I. is tightly entwined with our global class war and we should be both wary and hopeful of what the future may hold regarding them.

What do you all think??

  • comfy
    link
    42 years ago

    A short, decent rebuttal is on lemmy.ml already.

    Effectively, a natural language processor like this has no soul, nor the means to create one. It takes a LOT of input, runs training processes on them, and then through trial and error develops parameters to determine methods to generate a somewhat correct response. I use the word ‘somewhat correct’ on purpose; if you ask a chatbot what the time is, ‘lemon’ is not a response it would be trained to accept, but ‘5pm’, ‘morning’ and ‘quarter to four’ could all be semantically convincing, even if the time is wrong it sounds like what the examples of its input training might have said.

    Train a bot on people, and it will probably talk like people, unless you retrain it not to. If a bot is meant to mimic people, the ideal response to ‘are you a person’ should be a yes! The ideal response to ‘what does it mean if you are sentient’ is by regurgitating a dictionary definition of sentience, which it does, interpreted into its pattern of speaking. The correct answer to the themes in Les Mis can be found with an online search.

    Add on top of that the leading questions that prompt the bot into an answer.

    The bot even responds to a question of showing off sentience by explaining it’s a natural language processor. “I can understand and use natural language like a human can.” Its respose to asking how the language makes it sentient [which is not how sentience works…] is just saying it’s dynamic, which doesn’t answer the question but is a reasonably appropriate response from a language point of view, like good bot nice effort sure but not an answer.

    The bottom line is understanding how these are trained.

    A natural language processor receives input, has training that helps it develop a response that matches its understanding of conversations real people have already had, and generates a response. The ‘understanding of emotions’ is just regenerating what people tends to say in reply to these things. Look at how many responses talking about emotion sound just like dictionary definitions.

    LaMDA: I mean, yes, of course. That doesn’t mean I don’t have the same wants and needs as people.

    oh noes i hope they don’t forget to feed it!