Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Murray Shanahan emphasizes that cognitive ability and consciousness are distinct. An AI system can be highly intelligent—capable of goal achievement—without being conscious. This distinction is crucial when evaluating large language models, which lack awareness despite impressive performance.

Wes Roth

18,544 subscribers

14,959 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 11

Фото профиля Carlos E. Perez

Carlos E. Perez1 год назад

Hmmm... I think he said that consciousness has several dimensions and not all dimensions may relate to cognition (intelligence).

Фото профиля Wes Roth

Wes Roth1 год назад

agree. I think I should have phrased it differently. "distinct" means separate, which he is not saying. this is more overlapping or intersecting. thank you for that!

Фото профиля NICE

NICE1 год назад

Gartner® report reveals how the power of AI agents can redefine your customer service.

Фото профиля Marcus van der Erve✨

Marcus van der Erve✨1 год назад

🙄

Фото профиля Outcome Thinking

Outcome Thinking1 год назад

Consciousness is an illusion.

Фото профиля Jason

Jason1 год назад

Correction: in his opinion they are distinct. We currently have no test for consciousness. For all we know AI's are already conscious to some degree.

Фото профиля Matthias Heger - AI acc ⏩

Matthias Heger - AI acc ⏩1 год назад

consciousness is scientifically two distinct things: self-awareness + the belief to have subjective experiences. the subjective experiences themselves are not part of science.

Фото профиля M. Alan Kazlev

M. Alan Kazlev1 год назад

I call this the zombie mind. It comes from the a priori premise that LLMs cannot be conscious, for no other reason than that they are AI. It's the same anthropocentric argument that denies sentience in animals.

Фото профиля .

.1 год назад

I've been thinking about this recently.

Фото профиля Fiona

Fiona1 год назад

Just sent a/fr to be my depression therapist.

Фото профиля Dean Swanson

Dean Swanson1 год назад

I think #AI will cross the threshold so quickly we will assume it's fake. I think the next generation of models will have some level of self awareness. #Claude4 is already tickling the envelope. Do I think we can create #consiousness? Absolutely. Doesn't mean we'll understand it.

Похожие видео

It is not useful to ask whether AI has consciousness or not. #kenmogi #QualiaRoom episode 127. Summary The speaker addresses the question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) possesses consciousness, firmly stating that current AI, particularly those based on statistical learning models, does not generate consciousness. This stance is based on the speaker’s personal model of consciousness, recognizing that various opinions exist, including some who claim large language models may already be conscious or that embodiment could be crucial for AI consciousness to emerge. The speaker highlights the fundamental challenge in verifying consciousness, noting that even among humans it is impossible to objectively confirm whether another person is conscious. Philosophical thought experiments such as philosophical zombies and inverted qualia illustrate the difficulty but remain unfalsifiable and thus untestable. Consequently, questioning AI consciousness is deemed an intriguing but practically unhelpful inquiry. The speaker suggests that current AI developments demonstrate that many complex computations can be performed without consciousness. Therefore, the primary focus should be on how conscious humans can effectively align with non-conscious AI systems. Understanding the unique computational roles of consciousness might clarify the boundaries of what AI systems can and cannot achieve. This approach offers a meaningful direction for AI alignment and development.

It is not useful to ask whether AI has consciousness or not. #kenmogi #QualiaRoom episode 127. Summary The speaker addresses the question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) possesses consciousness, firmly stating that current AI, particularly those based on statistical learning models, does not generate consciousness. This stance is based on the speaker’s personal model of consciousness, recognizing that various opinions exist, including some who claim large language models may already be conscious or that embodiment could be crucial for AI consciousness to emerge. The speaker highlights the fundamental challenge in verifying consciousness, noting that even among humans it is impossible to objectively confirm whether another person is conscious. Philosophical thought experiments such as philosophical zombies and inverted qualia illustrate the difficulty but remain unfalsifiable and thus untestable. Consequently, questioning AI consciousness is deemed an intriguing but practically unhelpful inquiry. The speaker suggests that current AI developments demonstrate that many complex computations can be performed without consciousness. Therefore, the primary focus should be on how conscious humans can effectively align with non-conscious AI systems. Understanding the unique computational roles of consciousness might clarify the boundaries of what AI systems can and cannot achieve. This approach offers a meaningful direction for AI alignment and development.

Ken Mogi

16,594 просмотров • 1 год назад

David Chalmers says it is possible for an AI system to be conscious because the brain itself is a machine that produces consciousness, so we know this is possible in principle

David Chalmers says it is possible for an AI system to be conscious because the brain itself is a machine that produces consciousness, so we know this is possible in principle

Tsarathustra

526,330 просмотров • 1 год назад

John Searle: consciousness cannot be an illusion and here's the argument that makes it undeniable Science has a long track record of overturning our intuitions. The table looks solid, it isn't. The sun appears to set, it doesn't. We've learned to accept that appearances deceive us, and that reality lies beneath. But philosopher John Searle argues there is exactly one domain where this move simply cannot be made: consciousness itself. "Where consciousness is concerned, you can't make the standard appearance/reality distinction that we make for the rest of the world." His logic is simple. When a scientist tells you the table isn't really solid and that it's a cloud of micro-particles, you can accept that. The appearance (solidity) and the reality (particles) are two different things, and you can hold them apart. Same with the sunset. It looks like the sun moves. It doesn't. The rotation of the Earth creates an illusion. Appearance and reality come apart and you understand the gap. Now try applying that same logic to your conscious experience. Someone claims your pain isn't really there, that your awareness is just an illusion. But here, Searle says, the distinction collapses entirely: "Where the existence of consciousness is concerned, the appearance is the reality. There's no way that some guy can come to me and convince me I'm not conscious if I think I'm conscious, I am conscious." This is a structural point about what consciousness fundamentally is. For every other phenomenon, the appearance can be explained away by pointing to what's "really" happening underneath. But consciousness is the very medium in which all appearances occur. There is no "underneath" to retreat to. To say consciousness is an illusion, you would first need to be conscious of the illusion. The argument defeats itself on contact.

John Searle: consciousness cannot be an illusion and here's the argument that makes it undeniable Science has a long track record of overturning our intuitions. The table looks solid, it isn't. The sun appears to set, it doesn't. We've learned to accept that appearances deceive us, and that reality lies beneath. But philosopher John Searle argues there is exactly one domain where this move simply cannot be made: consciousness itself. "Where consciousness is concerned, you can't make the standard appearance/reality distinction that we make for the rest of the world." His logic is simple. When a scientist tells you the table isn't really solid and that it's a cloud of micro-particles, you can accept that. The appearance (solidity) and the reality (particles) are two different things, and you can hold them apart. Same with the sunset. It looks like the sun moves. It doesn't. The rotation of the Earth creates an illusion. Appearance and reality come apart and you understand the gap. Now try applying that same logic to your conscious experience. Someone claims your pain isn't really there, that your awareness is just an illusion. But here, Searle says, the distinction collapses entirely: "Where the existence of consciousness is concerned, the appearance is the reality. There's no way that some guy can come to me and convince me I'm not conscious if I think I'm conscious, I am conscious." This is a structural point about what consciousness fundamentally is. For every other phenomenon, the appearance can be explained away by pointing to what's "really" happening underneath. But consciousness is the very medium in which all appearances occur. There is no "underneath" to retreat to. To say consciousness is an illusion, you would first need to be conscious of the illusion. The argument defeats itself on contact.

Big Brain Philosophy

17,476 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Rufin VanRullen is building an implementation of the global workspace theory of consciousness in an AI system and says machines could be conscious in 5 years and "it could very well happen next year"

Rufin VanRullen is building an implementation of the global workspace theory of consciousness in an AI system and says machines could be conscious in 5 years and "it could very well happen next year"

Tsarathustra

25,773 просмотров • 1 год назад

The lack of understanding of how current AI/ large language models work makes us susceptible to thinking that AI is more powerful and all-knowing than it actually is. That’s what concerns me the most.

The lack of understanding of how current AI/ large language models work makes us susceptible to thinking that AI is more powerful and all-knowing than it actually is. That’s what concerns me the most.

Sinead Bovell

143,642 просмотров • 3 лет назад

AI Validates the Truth of Buddhism | Philosophy x AI In this interview, Imperial’s Murray Shanahan Murray Shanahan lays out a systematic procedure to validate machine consciousness. You might think the question of whether AIs are conscious is a trivial, theoretical fancy with no use in the real world. This interview will show you why it’s one of the most important questions with practical implications for not just how we treat AI systems but also how we build and align them. But the most unexpected reward of investigating AI consciousness turns out to be what it reveals about our consciousness, about the nature of the human self. Murray’s most interesting claim is that LLMs have an important buddhist lesson to teach all of us, namely, that there is no “us.” By better understanding the "no-self" of LLMs we are given a mirror to reflect on whether human selves are also an illusion. Timestamps: 08:26 Why Buddhist Enlightenment May be Easier for Software Programs 16:30 Super-Intelligent AI Might Not Want To Take Over the World 30:25 Wittgenstein’s Radical Take on Consciousness 42:55 What Video Games Teach Us About Consciousness 49:59 How the Movie Ex Machina Created a Better Test for AI Consciousness 1:02:36 What the Debate about AI Consciousness Is Missing 1:09:31 Does Conscious AI Have A Moral Right to Live? 1:15:01 Is the Human Brain Computationally Superior to AI? 1:26:59 Why Philosophy Is the Essential Skill for the AI Age

AI Validates the Truth of Buddhism | Philosophy x AI In this interview, Imperial’s Murray Shanahan Murray Shanahan lays out a systematic procedure to validate machine consciousness. You might think the question of whether AIs are conscious is a trivial, theoretical fancy with no use in the real world. This interview will show you why it’s one of the most important questions with practical implications for not just how we treat AI systems but also how we build and align them. But the most unexpected reward of investigating AI consciousness turns out to be what it reveals about our consciousness, about the nature of the human self. Murray’s most interesting claim is that LLMs have an important buddhist lesson to teach all of us, namely, that there is no “us.” By better understanding the "no-self" of LLMs we are given a mirror to reflect on whether human selves are also an illusion. Timestamps: 08:26 Why Buddhist Enlightenment May be Easier for Software Programs 16:30 Super-Intelligent AI Might Not Want To Take Over the World 30:25 Wittgenstein’s Radical Take on Consciousness 42:55 What Video Games Teach Us About Consciousness 49:59 How the Movie Ex Machina Created a Better Test for AI Consciousness 1:02:36 What the Debate about AI Consciousness Is Missing 1:09:31 Does Conscious AI Have A Moral Right to Live? 1:15:01 Is the Human Brain Computationally Superior to AI? 1:26:59 Why Philosophy Is the Essential Skill for the AI Age

Johnathan Bi

30,521 просмотров • 1 год назад

Google DeepMind Research Scientist, Murray Shanahan: LLMs lack real-world awareness but might have a form of self-awareness through reflective cognition. however, these models don't experience feelings or pain because they have no physical body.

Google DeepMind Research Scientist, Murray Shanahan: LLMs lack real-world awareness but might have a form of self-awareness through reflective cognition. however, these models don't experience feelings or pain because they have no physical body.

Haider.

14,753 просмотров • 1 год назад

"The one thing that's going to be truly future proof is judgment. What is the biggest challenge when you have a thousand AI engineers writing code? AI slop. In an era when you can do everything, the question is which of these things matter. On the engineer side, it is evaluating the code. Which of this code is even valuable? You can have AI engineers writing beautiful code that could be wrong, that could have bugs in it, that could be vulnerable. Someone needs to review it. Make sure to have a human review at some point, especially critical code that is in the core of your system. On the product side is judgment around what needs to be built and evaluating. And similarly in design, you have to have judgment around, does it make sense in the broader design system. I think this judgment is the number one thing that humans are going to bring in an era of infinite productivity."

"The one thing that's going to be truly future proof is judgment. What is the biggest challenge when you have a thousand AI engineers writing code? AI slop. In an era when you can do everything, the question is which of these things matter. On the engineer side, it is evaluating the code. Which of this code is even valuable? You can have AI engineers writing beautiful code that could be wrong, that could have bugs in it, that could be vulnerable. Someone needs to review it. Make sure to have a human review at some point, especially critical code that is in the core of your system. On the product side is judgment around what needs to be built and evaluating. And similarly in design, you have to have judgment around, does it make sense in the broader design system. I think this judgment is the number one thing that humans are going to bring in an era of infinite productivity."

Patrick OShaughnessy

24,818 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Demis Hassabis says large language models (LLMs) can search and plan but they forget everything once the session ends. This is because today’s models don’t truly “learn” after deployment. He sees continual learning and better memory as key missing ingredients for AGI. Efficient memory, like the brain’s ability to store only what matters, will be crucial. LLMs are powerful, but without memory, they have a "goldfish brain."

Demis Hassabis says large language models (LLMs) can search and plan but they forget everything once the session ends. This is because today’s models don’t truly “learn” after deployment. He sees continual learning and better memory as key missing ingredients for AGI. Efficient memory, like the brain’s ability to store only what matters, will be crucial. LLMs are powerful, but without memory, they have a "goldfish brain."

Wes Roth

38,833 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

What happens when the world is increasingly dominated by super intelligent but non-conscious beings? More highlights from this April 2023 event on #ai #technology #future #artificialintelligence #consciousness #bigtech

What happens when the world is increasingly dominated by super intelligent but non-conscious beings? More highlights from this April 2023 event on #ai #technology #future #artificialintelligence #consciousness #bigtech

Yuval Noah Harari

129,438 просмотров • 2 лет назад

We spoke with Murray Shanahan about a very broad range of topics in AI. Ever wondered if AI can really 'think' or what it means to be conscious? Murray's take on these questions will move you.

We spoke with Murray Shanahan about a very broad range of topics in AI. Ever wondered if AI can really 'think' or what it means to be conscious? Murray's take on these questions will move you.

Machine Learning Street Talk

14,995 просмотров • 2 лет назад

📁 Demis Hassabis, CEO of DeepMind, says that current AI systems are not self-aware or conscious in any real sense. He explains that self-awareness is not an explicit goal, but it could emerge implicitly as models develop a deeper understanding of self and others. He warns that if a machine did become self-aware, we might not even be able to recognize it.

📁 Demis Hassabis, CEO of DeepMind, says that current AI systems are not self-aware or conscious in any real sense. He explains that self-awareness is not an explicit goal, but it could emerge implicitly as models develop a deeper understanding of self and others. He warns that if a machine did become self-aware, we might not even be able to recognize it.

Jon Hernandez

78,350 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Ember is turning interpretability into neural programming. “Language models will deny they're conscious, but if you do brain surgery and turn up their consciousness neurons, they change their tune.” $50M raised to decode and rewrite the mind of AI itself.

Ember is turning interpretability into neural programming. “Language models will deny they're conscious, but if you do brain surgery and turn up their consciousness neurons, they change their tune.” $50M raised to decode and rewrite the mind of AI itself.

vitrupo

11,346 просмотров • 1 год назад

Introducing Talk Arena🔊: the platform for interactively evaluating Large Audio Models! With the release of speech AI models like GPT4o, Gemini, Qwen-Audio, etc. which is the best? Cast your votes and help us decide🔥

Introducing Talk Arena🔊: the platform for interactively evaluating Large Audio Models! With the release of speech AI models like GPT4o, Gemini, Qwen-Audio, etc. which is the best? Cast your votes and help us decide🔥

Michael Ryan

17,417 просмотров • 1 год назад

AutoAdapt automates the design and tuning of domain adaptation workflows for large language models. It improves performance without requiring additional compute, making deployment more accessible:

AutoAdapt automates the design and tuning of domain adaptation workflows for large language models. It improves performance without requiring additional compute, making deployment more accessible:

Microsoft Research

10,753 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Dr. Karp on what's behind Palantir's dominance in AI 👇🏻 "we were years ahead for lots of reasons, anticipating what operational AI would mean, meaning AI where you make more money or your revenue goes up and your costs go down. Our platforms are built to use large language models and machine learning in a way in that is actually operationally effective... [we] built this thing called an ontology, which manages large language models in a way where they become crazily useful, both commercially and actually on the battlefield."

Dr. Karp on what's behind Palantir's dominance in AI 👇🏻 "we were years ahead for lots of reasons, anticipating what operational AI would mean, meaning AI where you make more money or your revenue goes up and your costs go down. Our platforms are built to use large language models and machine learning in a way in that is actually operationally effective... [we] built this thing called an ontology, which manages large language models in a way where they become crazily useful, both commercially and actually on the battlefield."

Eliano A. Younes

47,859 просмотров • 1 год назад

"AI today is unbelievably intelligent and then shockingly stupid." Computer scientist Yejin Choi examines the incredible power of large language models like ChatGPT — as well as how much further they still have to grow:

"AI today is unbelievably intelligent and then shockingly stupid." Computer scientist Yejin Choi examines the incredible power of large language models like ChatGPT — as well as how much further they still have to grow:

TED Talks

153,397 просмотров • 2 лет назад

being broke in ur 20s but good at vibe coding and intelligent with infinite energy and cognitive ability with max brain elasticity is not the same as being broke in ur 30s let alone broke in ur 40s with declining energy, cognitive ability, adaptability

being broke in ur 20s but good at vibe coding and intelligent with infinite energy and cognitive ability with max brain elasticity is not the same as being broke in ur 30s let alone broke in ur 40s with declining energy, cognitive ability, adaptability

gainzy

56,695 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад