this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2026
76 points (81.7% liked)

Technology

87575 readers
3754 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

But what when an LLM trains its self?

Thats what I'm saying. They cannot do this, not even close. Even a fruit fly is somewhat adaptive and can respond to novel stimuli, but an LLM effectively cant.

There are tiny experimental models closer to a fruit fly than large LLMs now.

...What about future world models with some adaptive learning loop, sampling stripped out, and so on?

Yeah! That would be fascinating. Then sentience starts to become more of a question.

But thats not what LLMs are.

People like Altman and Modi have grossly overexaggerated what current LLM architectures are capable of, they trained the LLMs to reinforce the illusion as much as they can, and they arent to inclined to change it. Hence all the good researchers have fled to research world models, and are saying transformers LLMs are not a viable path forward.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Even in your highly optimistic scenario, the AI wouldn’t even come close to being comparable to actual sentience.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Well, theres a lot of experimentation with actual neural nets mimicing biology (or literally using biological neurons), and I think that could start to raise the spectre.

World model research could be a significant component of that.

In principle, OP is right; humans are just machines. All I constest is that transformers LLMs are even in the same ballpark, or possibly a path there... they are not.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Well it sounds like we agree then.

I would think you would need actual biological structures to achieve sentience. That’s a lot different than what these people are calling AI tho.

Edit: Also, if it is built out of natural biological pieces, at what point does it cease to be “artificial”?

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Well biological structures can be replicated mechanically. So at risk of being pedantic, that's not strictly true.

I view "artificial" as just a term for conscious, purpose construction, whereas "natural" does not involve any conscious intelligence, as in "naturally occurring in nature." But even that is a spectrum, I guess, with genetic manipulation, BCIs, all sorts of intermediate possibilities.

I'd call a constructed, purely biological brain "artificial" because, even if it was grown naturally, it was built with conscious intent.

[–] rayboy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Correct, nothing is special about biological consciousness. If these exact functions are replicated mechanically/artificially, the outcomes would be the same.