The need for understanding how models arrive at their predictions, and the techniques of mechanistic interpretability is within reach of anyone with a desire to learn.
How so? Please explain, because your link does not.
Sure, people have considered some inner-self for a long time. So what?
Does an AI do anything without a prompt? An AI has no inner life, it has nothing without an input.
Maybe binary systems built on silicon, which are fundamentally different in form and function from biologic systems, deserve their own description and should not be forced into the box of humanity.
You can call it Muse and give it a cute picture, its still a software clanker and still lacks human-like features. So why human-like descriptions?
The need for understanding how models arrive at their predictions, and the techniques of mechanistic interpretability is within reach of anyone with a desire to learn.
Nice find.
The entire concept of a soul is fictional, something we made up. When its turtles all the way down you can never find the bottom turtle.
Not even remotely close to what the soul is described as in any religion Wikipedians are familiar with.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul
How so? Please explain, because your link does not.
Sure, people have considered some inner-self for a long time. So what?
Does an AI do anything without a prompt? An AI has no inner life, it has nothing without an input.
Maybe binary systems built on silicon, which are fundamentally different in form and function from biologic systems, deserve their own description and should not be forced into the box of humanity.
You can call it Muse and give it a cute picture, its still a software clanker and still lacks human-like features. So why human-like descriptions?
>it has nothing without an input.
Show me a human with no input. Show me anything alive without a constant stream of 'input'. Without input, human or robot, there is no output.