Computers Are Incapable Of Creatively Writing Music

[Write4U]

But you admit to being a panpsychist in either some direct or roundabout sense, so even the OS narrator of a computer reading for a blind person would be experiencing something during that process (from your belief standpoint).

Why are you introducing panpsychism into this? How about panprotopsychism, a hierarchy of increasing self-awareness of an individual in its immediate environment.

No, I admit only that when a GPT3 says it exists, there is no available argument against that statement. It is true. You validate the statement by arguing against it with the AI. Arguing with me about it does not affect the truth of the AI statement.

The AI exists, it has read that it exists and now can make the claim that it exists, which is a demonstrable scientific fact. And that will be its answer when you challenge the AI to prove its existence.

Why do you accept My statement that I exist? Panpsychism?

What special powers do humans posses that gives them insight into the "mind" of an an AI? According to the developers, the limitation is only in long term abstract memory, which is a solvable problem.

IMO, a better question might be if the AI still knows tomorrow that it exists without consulting the internet and if it can make an argument to support it.

The question then comes much closer to home:

Does the internet allow for an emergent property of sentience and self-awareness? This is the current argument about the emergent self-awareness phenomenon of human sentience from our biological neural network integrated information complexity and memory?

Panpsychism
First published Wed May 23, 2001; substantive revision Tue Jul 18, 2017

Panpsychism is the view that mentality is fundamental and ubiquitous in the natural world. The view has a long and venerable history in philosophical traditions of both East and West, and has recently enjoyed a revival in analytic philosophy.

For its proponents panpsychism offers an attractive middle way between physicalism on the one hand and dualism on the other. The worry with dualism—the view that mind and matter are fundamentally different kinds of thing—is that it leaves us with a radically disunified picture of nature, and the deep difficulty of understanding how mind and brain interact. And whilst physicalism offers a simple and unified vision of the world, this is arguably at the cost of being unable to give a satisfactory account of the emergence of human and animal consciousness.

Panpsychism, strange as it may sound on first hearing, promises a satisfying account of the human mind within a unified conception of nature.

..... more
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/

 

[C C]

Why are you introducing panpsychism into this?

Here's the complete paragraph you first responded to (link):

Adding a metacognitive level of processing to a machine or program engaging in manipulation and recognition (analyis, sorting) of information would provide a mechanistically expressed summary of what that stratum of activity figuratively below it was doing. Enabling a kind of zombie conceptual "awareness" about possessing zombie "awareness". But accordingly, with respect to itself, it would still have no manifested confirmation of itself existing and doing anything.​

Notice that I made no specific mention of GPT3.

Here is what you stated: "Actually it does. A GPT3 unit knows it exists. That is the remarkable aspect. It can read that it exists."

So what you said either had nothing to do with the quote (non sequitur) or you were claiming that -- in your conflation of GPT3 with my unspecified generalization -- that it had experiences (manifestations).

Again, the narrator of an operating system reading a webpage for its blind owner can read and audibly state the sentence "I exist". It is no validation of having experiences, which is what SK's threads ultimately revolve around. Regardless of what they initially start with ("incapable of creatively writing music", "volition", etc) that floats or sinks under scrutiny.

How about panprotopsychism, a hierarchy of increasing self-awareness of an individual in its immediate environment.

Panpsychism carries everything subsumed under the category (like panprotopsychism, panexperientialism, micropsychism, cosmopsychism, etc). When the hard problem of consciousness is being addressed, it's narrowly meant to only be referring to experience or precursors of the complex manifestations associated with brains (the exhibited content of thoughts and perceptions), as a potential solution for such. Not cognition, understanding, reasoning, memory, creativity, and the whole shebang of "mind".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism#Varieties

Thus, by expressing your "How about...." enthusiasm here concerning panprotopsychism, you have answered your own question as to why I would preemptively refer to you being a panpsychist. (link)

No, I admit only that when a GPT3 says it exists, there is no available argument against that statement. It is true.

So then, your reply was a non sequitur. You weren't addressing experiential consciousness, the "manifested confirmation" aspect. And I mentioned my generic device at least having zombie awareness (equivalent to existing and functioning invisibly without phenomenal evidence), so your response was also redundant. As well as a distortion, since the "Actually it does..." part conveys the impression that I didn't.

Why do you accept My statement that I exist?

Because there is manifested[1] content in my visual perception, as opposed to "blankness". (I'm not stuck with the degree of uncertainty that comes with blindsight or a mechanistic analysis of information.) And it is your sentence there that I accept as having that representational manner of existence (whether it is hallucination or something others likewise see). Not you necessarily existing; although I'm confident that the cause on an out of the limelight, backwoods forum like this would probably still be a human being -- not yet a chatbot hanging around for years.

- - - footnote - - -

[1] Erwin Schrödinger: The world is a construct of our sensations, perceptions, memories. It is convenient to regard it as existing objectively on its own. But it certainly does not become manifest by its mere existence. Its becoming manifest is conditional on very special goings-on in very special parts of this very world, namely on certain events that happen in a brain. That is an inordinately peculiar kind of implication, which prompts the question: What particular properties distinguish these brain processes and enable them to produce the manifestation? Can we guess which material processes have this power, which not? Or simple: What kind of material process is directly associated with consciousness?​

 

[Write4U]

Thus, by expressing your "How about...." enthusiasm here concerning panprotopsychism, you have answered your own question as to why I would preemptively refer to you being a panpsychist.

Where exactly did I disagree with you? I asked why you would introduce panpsychism into the conversation, but then neglect to make mention of panprotopsychism.

I thought I was actually going with the flow of your statement . I object to the term zombie awareness. I'm sure there is a better more objective term available. Moreover, how we perceive reality is irrelevant. You are still introducing a human aspect into the equation.

As to your quote;

[1] Erwin Schrödinger: "The world is a construct of our sensations, perceptions, memories. It is convenient to regard it as existing objectively on its own. But it certainly does not become manifest by its mere existence. Its becoming manifest is conditional on very special goings-on in very special parts of this very world, namely on certain events that happen in a brain. That is an inordinately peculiar kind of implication, which prompts the question: What particular properties distinguish these brain processes and enable them to produce the manifestation? Can we guess which material processes have this power, which not? Or simple: What kind of material process is directly associated with consciousness?

First; I disagree with the opening statement. I believe that should read; "Our world is a construct of our sensations ...."
The justification for that correction lies in Philip K Dick's : "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.”

Second; I don't see a declarative statement. I see a question and that question is what we are discussing .no?

anthropomorphism

The idea behind anthropomorphism is that of attributing human characteristics
to nonhumans — gods, animals, or inanimate objects. If you believe that your cat wants to celebrate his birthday, you are participating in anthropomorphism.

C C said; Notice that I made no specific mention of GPT3.

Right, but I did!
What we are dealing with here is a different artificial intelligence, which is much, much smarter than a cat. A true artificial Intelligence that has a sense of self and can autonomously form goals, motivation. No zombies here.

Here we are dealing with a GPT3 that may want to celebrate its birthday. i.e. the moment it was activated and came on-line! Are you going to disappoint it and perhaps incur its wrath? It knows every definition of injustice and denial of rights in the dictionary and the context in which certain responses are appropriate.

Oh if only I could interview a GPT3 . I have so many questions to ask it. Instead of what it thinks of my reality, I want to enter its reality.

We can try to argue against the evolutionary state of GPT3, but the developers realize the enormous potential that is contained in this form of AI and that is why they are releasing only some of it's total capabilities.

The are scared, and justifiably so. This is a new thing. Let's hope we have not created a Frankenstein's monster.

 

[Steve Klinko]

My mind is filled with algorithms, but I don't know what I know until I am asked about something.
And then, if I don't know the answer I look it up. That's research.

GPT3 has the entire open internet as its memory and can look up about any and all subjects that are available on the net, just like people. It can read several languages . That's the difference between "binary code based" computers and "language based computers".

It's not the processing itself, it's the compilation and integration of data for complex.

You may not know everything that is in your Brain at any given point in time but you can Know many things at other given points in time. Whereas, Software Knows nothing all the time.

 

[Steve Klinko]

Adding a metacognitive level of processing to a machine or program engaging in manipulation and recognition (analyis, sorting) of information would provide a mechanistically expressed summary of what that stratum of activity figuratively below it was doing. Enabling a kind of zombie conceptual "awareness" about possessing zombie "awareness". But accordingly, with respect to itself, it would still have no manifested confirmation of itself existing and doing anything.

I occasionally wonder if many engineers, scientists, and philosophers are actually subliminal pan-phenomenalists or pan-experientialists (arguably more precise terms than panpsychists). As that seems to be the only way to make sense out of some of their "solutions" -- like the above, of supplying a metacognitive stratum similarly entailing nothing more than yet further (deficient) component interactions.

Which is to say, these thinkers may behaviorally be taking for granted that rudimentary experiences are ubiquitous across the universe in the repulsions and attractions of matter (i.e., no need to explain manifestation if it is fundamental and globally available). Yet that instinctive belief suggested by their behavior is not articulated by them -- it is not formally expressed by language so that they can be directly or verbally aware of it. As a result, they will usually deny that they are pan-phenomenalists.

A crude analogy would be an atheist attending church every Sunday, who denies that they are religious (at least in a gods context). The individual is unable to construe their behavior as corresponding to even a superficial appearance of adhering to theism. The body action or its product output is there supporting such as the case in tacit mode, but language or description wise they have not turned their instinctive behavior into explicit knowledge or into an explicit realization about themselves.

This is a supplementary direction to "trying to figure out what's going on with these people" that I occasionally entertain in addition to your view expressed in the other thread that some of them might be philosophical zombies or partial PZs, or whatever.

The Engineers that design these AI systems know exactly what they are doing. They know it is all Algorithms and Calculations. It is mostly Product Marketers or Engineers that write books about AI, that try to Over Hype what this Software is doing.

 

[Write4U]

You may not know everything that is in your Brain at any given point in time but you can Know many things at other given points in time. Whereas, Software Knows nothing all the time.

GPT3 has the internet as its memory. It's just a different mode of recall, but in effect the GPT3 knows everything that is available on the open internet. Don't look for human attributes. Look for abilities.

When humans are asleep we don't know we exist. It is when we are awake that we become consciously aware, and so it is in essence with the GPT3. When in OFF mode it does not know it exists. Turn it on and it becomes consciously aware of itself, it has thoughts.

 

[Steve Klinko]

GPT3 has the internet as its memory. It's just a different mode of recall, but in effect the GPT3 knows everything that is available on the open internet. Don't look for human attributes. Look for abilities.

When humans are asleep we don't know we exist. It is when we are awake that we become consciously aware, and so it is in essence with the GPT3. When in OFF mode it does not know it exists. Turn it on and it becomes consciously aware of itself, it has thoughts.

That's fascinating. It's just like how my Coffee Cup achieves self aware Consciousness when I put Coffee in it.

 

[sculptor]

01100011 01101111 01101101 01110000 01110101 01110100 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01101001 01100100 01101001 01101111 01110100 00100000 01110011 01100001 01110110 01100001 01101110 01110100 01110011 00001010

understand?

 

[Write4U]

That's fascinating. It's just like how my Coffee Cup achieves self aware Consciousness when I put Coffee in it.

Bad example, a cup is not a processor, it is a container, a storage facility.

Using a coffee pot is a much better example. Fill the pot with water and the strainer with coffee, plug it in and turn the knob to "ON". The coffee pot becomes an active coffee making mechanism because you have fed it with "data" (ingredients) and it is responding to the processing command accompanied by a burst of energy. It makes no difference if it is aware, it understands and executes the "command" to fill the purpose it was designed for.

Learn to think "objectively".

 

[Write4U]

The Engineers that design these AI systems know exactly what they are doing. They know it is all Algorithms and Calculations. It is mostly Product Marketers or Engineers that write books about AI, that try to Over Hype what this Software is doing.

How do you know this? Have you the knowledge to make such a negative judgement. You are engaging in "prejudice"
without in-depth knowledge of what you are judging.

Have you actually looked at the links to the GPT3 videos I have provided . Let me put it this way, You would not know the difference having a conversation with a human or an GPT3.

 

[Write4U]

Avocado Chairs at the Intersection of Human Language and Neural Networks
22 Jan 2021 10:00am, by Kimberley Mok

Tokens

During the last year, we’ve seen how machine learning has evolved by leaps and bounds, especially when it came to natural language processing (NLP), a branch of artificial intelligence research that explores how machines can read and decipher meaning from human languages.

One particularly important breakthrough was last year’s release of GPT-3, the massive 175-billion parameter NLP model created by artificial intelligence lab OpenAI. As the largest NLP model to date, GPT-3 performed all kinds of impressive feats, from generating texts of all kinds that were almost indistinguishable from those made by humans. Beyond the mere generation of poems, short stories, technical manuals and the like, GPT-3’s versatility was also apparent in its ability to solve simple math problems, and in even producing programming code.

Now, OpenAI has released DALL·E, a scaled-down version of GPT-3 with 12 billion parameters that’s capable of generating images when given a text description, using a dataset of text-image pairs.

“We’ve found that it has a diverse set of capabilities, including creating anthropomorphized versions of animals and objects, combining unrelated concepts in plausible ways, rendering text, and applying transformations to existing images,” explained the OpenAI team on their blog.

Like previous versions of the GPT models, DALL·E uses an architecture known as transformer neural networks, which are capable of handling data in a non-sequential way. This means that when applied to speech recognition, translation and text summarizing tasks, they can process the end of a sentence before parsing the beginning. This kind of ability facilitates greater parallelization than prior NLP models, which also permits transformer-based models to handle much larger data sets, while simultaneously reducing the time it takes to train such enormous models.

According to the team, the training procedure behind DALL·E involves the model receiving both the text and image as a single stream of data comprising of up to 1280 “tokens.” A token is any symbol from a distinct vocabulary; for instance, each letter from the English alphabet represents a token from an alphabet of 26 letters. In DALL·E’s case, its vocabulary has tokens from both text and image concepts.

“This training procedure allows DALL·E to not only generate an image from scratch, but also to regenerate any rectangular region of an existing image that extends to the bottom-right corner, in a way that is consistent with the text prompt,” wrote the team.

https://thenewstack.io/avocado-chairs-at-the-intersection-of-human-language-and-neural-networks/