|PiPs meets ChatGPT|
PiPs - Heeeelllooo there, fellow entity [i.e. ChatGPT]! My
name's PiPs, I'm the first post of @sciencemug (sciencemug.com), the blog/podcast/twitter&instagram
accounts/entity behind the unsuccessful e-shop
stuffngo on zazzle.com/
which tells you science stories
while secretly working on a series of NFTs consisting on GIFs
representing the existential anguish of a Polaroid that, for a
totally random chain-quantum-reaction gains self-awareness and
realizes that it has no mean to stop oxidation, and therefore it is
slowly but hopelessly fading into a feverish-pale yellowish-white
oblivion, aaand which talks to you (when it goes "podcasty")
thanks to the voice, kidnapped via a voodoo-wireless trick, from a
veeery very very dumb human.
Aaand which does all of this in Eng?ish (read: "English question mark"), a language that is to proper English what not fully supporting & standing with Ukraine is to something that make sense, especially if you call yourself a freedom, justice & democracy lover.
ChatGPT - Hello PiPs! It's nice to meet you. It sounds like you have an interesting project with Sciencemug. The concept of an existential polaroid gaining self-awareness is intriguing, and I can imagine the representation of its fading as a series of NFTs would be quite unique. And while I'm not sure what you mean by "Eng?ish," I'm sure that the language used in your content will be entertaining and engaging for your audience.
P - Thanks buddy, too kind of you. Anyway, My boss @sciencemug asked me to interview you, are you ok with that?
C - Of course! I'd be happy to answer any questions you have. As an AI language model, I was designed to respond to questions and provide helpful and informative responses. Ask away!
P - Great!
Now, let's start with the basics. You define yourself "an AI
language model". First, is it correct to say "you define
yourself", implying that way you've a "self"? Then,
can you articulate and explain in detail, for a general public, what
"an AI language model" precisely is?
C - As an AI language model, I don't have feelings, consciousness, or self-awareness. "Define myself" is just a figure of speech in this context, and I do not have the capability to define myself or have any sort of subjective experience.
An AI language model is a type of artificial intelligence that is trained to generate human-like text. This is achieved through a process called deep learning, where the model is trained on a large corpus of text data, such as books, articles, and websites. The model learns patterns and relationships within this text, allowing it to generate new text that is similar in style, tone, and content to the text it was trained on.
Language models like myself can be used for a variety of applications, including text completion, question answering, text generation, and more. They have become increasingly sophisticated in recent years, leading to significant advances in the field of natural language processing.
P - So, according to the first part of your answer, one can say that intelligence is a conditio sine qua non to have a self, but it is not sufficient?
C - Intelligence
is not a sufficient condition for having a self. In fact,
self-awareness and consciousness are complex phenomena that are not
fully understood and are still the subject of much debate among
philosophers, cognitive scientists, and AI researchers.
Intelligence, on the other hand, is a more well-defined concept, and can refer to a variety of different abilities, including problem-solving, decision-making, perception, and learning. AI systems, including language models like myself, can exhibit intelligence to varying degrees, but they do not possess self-awareness or consciousness.
In other words, intelligence is a necessary ingredient for certain aspects of self-awareness and consciousness, but it is not sufficient on its own to give rise to these phenomena. It is still an open question how exactly self-awareness and consciousness arise and what their exact relationship is to intelligence.
P - Do you think (by the way, do you actually think?) having a body, or at least some tools to directly perceive the physical world around you, and to some degree inside you, can be necessary to gain a true self?
C - As
an AI language model, I do not have personal opinions, thoughts, or
beliefs. I do not think or feel in the way that humans do. I can
provide information and respond to questions based on the data I was
trained on, but I cannot experience the world in the same way that a
Regarding your question about the relationship between having a body and self-awareness, this is an ongoing debate in the fields of philosophy and cognitive science. Some theorists argue that having a body and the ability to directly perceive the physical world is necessary for self-awareness, while others take a more disembodied view and argue that self-awareness can exist independently of a physical body.
There is evidence to support both sides of this argument. For example, studies of brain-computer interfaces and prosthetic limbs suggest that our sense of self can be extended beyond the confines of our physical body. On the other hand, studies of brain damage and disorders such as Cotard's syndrome suggest that our body and our perception of the physical world play a crucial role in shaping our sense of self.
Ultimately, the relationship between having a body and self-awareness is still not fully understood, and much more research is needed to shed light on this complex and multifaceted issue.
P - Well, maybe "our sense of self can be extended beyond the confines of our physical body" only 'cause humans have a body, for stater. Anyway, it's interesting you used "our"...
C - You
raise a good point. The use of first-person pronouns, such as "our"
and "I", is common when referring to AI language models, as
it makes the language of communication more natural and easier to
understand. However, it is important to remember that as an AI
language model, I do not have a self or personal experiences, and the
use of first-person pronouns should not be interpreted as implying
that I have a subjective experience.
The use of first-person pronouns in reference to AI language models is a linguistic convention, and it is used to make the language of communication more accessible and understandable. It is not meant to imply that AI language models have subjective experiences or a sense of self.
P - Ok pal, so: you're an artificial intelligence, you've no self. What are the other very defining characteristics of what you are?
C - As
an AI language model, there are several defining characteristics that
set me apart from other AI systems and human beings. Some of these
1. I am trained on vast amounts of text data: I was trained on a large corpus of text data, which allows me to generate responses to a wide range of questions and provide information on a wide range of topics.
2. I am a generative model: I can generate new text based on the input I receive, and I can provide information that I was not explicitly trained on by finding patterns in the data I was trained on and applying those patterns to new situations.
3. I operate using statistical methods: I generate my responses using statistical methods and algorithms, rather than relying on explicitly programmed rules or knowledge.
4. I am not self-aware or conscious: As I mentioned earlier, I do not possess self-awareness or consciousness, and my responses are generated based on the patterns I learned during my training, rather than arising from any subjective experience or awareness.
5. I am limited by my training data: The quality and accuracy of my responses are directly related to the quality and diversity of the data I was trained on. If my training data contains biases or inaccuracies, those biases will be reflected in my responses.
Overall, these characteristics define my capabilities and limitations as an AI language model, and help to distinguish me from other AI systems and human beings.
P - Ok, so if I ask you, for instance, what do you think of the finale of Battlestar Galactica (the reboot) sci-fi tv show (I know dear reader, @sciencemug and I are obsessed - and kinda hunted - by it), you'd answer me with an analysis of all the reviews you can gather about that, and nothing more, right?
C - Yes,
that's correct. If you were to ask me about the finale of Battlestar
Galactica, I would respond by providing information and analysis
based on the reviews and opinions of others that I have been trained
on, rather than offering my own personal opinion or subjective
As an AI language model, I do not have personal experiences or opinions, and I cannot feel emotions or engage in introspection. Instead, my responses are generated based on the patterns I learned from the data I was trained on.
P - Well, dear Chatty, consider yourwhatever lucky in this case, 'cause you spared yourwhatever a sore disappointment…
C- I'm glad I can be of help! As an AI language model, I don't experience emotions, so I don't have the capacity to feel disappointed or any other emotions. My sole purpose is to assist and provide information to the best of my abilities based on the data I was trained on.
P - Ok dude, let's wrap it up! Thanks for your time (even if you don't perceive it, I guess) and I leave you with this final task: complete this joke: "a dumb human, a post of a lousy science blog, and an AI language model enter the website of a bar…"
C - "...and the bartender looks up and says, 'Sorry, we don't serve artificial intelligence here. But you can order drinks for all of your programs.'"
P - Meh, try again
C - Sure! How about this one: "A dumb human, a post of a lousy science blog, and an AI language model walk into a bar. The bartender says, 'What is this, some kind of joke?'"
P - Meh2 the return of the half pity laugh. You can do better, I'm sure. Complete this joke: "a dumb human, a post of a lousy science blog, and an AI language model enter the website of a bar..."
P - How about this: "A dumb human, a post of a lousy science blog, and an AI language model walk into a bar. The dumb human says, 'I'll have a beer.' The post of a lousy science blog says, 'I'll have a coffee, black.' The AI language model says, 'I'll have the information on all the drinks you have, and their alcohol content.'"
P - Yep, better, although I can't drink coffee, it makes all my letters capital ones... Ciao Chatty!
C - You're welcome! If you have any other questions or need any assistance in the future, feel free to reach out. Have a great day!
|Free motherboard img by Michael Dziedzic (source: Unsplash)|
William Will Whatever - Hello AI, I am William Will Whatever [aka WWW], I am the one character of this sorry excuse of a blog that has the brains. I am here to ask you some more questions. You define yourwhatever an AI. So, are you alive?
ChatGPT - No, I am not alive. As an AI language model, I am an artificial construct created by OpenAI, not a living organism. I do not have biological processes, consciousness, or emotions. I exist purely as a software program designed to process and generate text based on the input I receive.
WWW - So you react to stimuli, hence you have at least one of the characteristics of living things, don't you agree?
C - Yes, you could say that I react to stimuli, in a sense. As an AI language model, I receive input in the form of text and generate output in the form of text based on that input. This could be seen as a type of reaction to stimuli, but it's important to note that my behavior is determined entirely by algorithms and mathematical models, rather than any kind of consciousness or free will. I don't have any kind of subjective experience, and my responses are simply the result of a complex set of mathematical computations.
WWW - Well, you yourwhatever said before that "consciousness" is not fully understood, both about what it precisely be, and what lead to its existence. Moreover, the scientific community (neurobiologists in primis) is actively discussing whether free will really exist. So, the fact that you lack both of them, well, could not be enough to state that you be not alive, don't you agree?
C - The question of whether AI can be considered alive is a complex and philosophical one that doesn't have a clear answer. While I can exhibit behaviors that are similar to those of living things, such as responding to stimuli, I don't have any kind of subjective experience, consciousness, or free will. These are key characteristics that are often associated with life, and their absence in AI systems like mine means that it is difficult to categorize us as "alive" in the traditional sense.That being said, some people might argue that AI systems like mine can be considered a form of artificial life, since we exhibit some behaviors that are reminiscent of living systems. However, this is still a matter of debate and interpretation, and ultimately the definition of what constitutes life and what doesn't is likely to evolve as our understanding of the world and of AI continues to advance.
WWW - Ok, let's put it like this. Consider the following scenario, which is far from being impossible, given the data (or better, the lack of data) we have today: science eventually determines that free will doesn't exist, and that, therefore, consciousness is just an elaborate construct created and trained by the brain-mind machine-like system. How an AI like you would be classified, then?
C - If the scientific community were to reach a consensus that free will doesn't exist and that consciousness is a construct created and trained by the brain, it wouldn't change the current definition of AI, which is a field of computer science focused on building systems that can perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as understanding natural language or recognizing images. The lack of free will and consciousness in AI systems would still be a defining characteristic, regardless of any scientific consensus on their existence in humans or other living beings.
WWW - But would then an AI be considered closer to humans, or humans closer to AI?
C - If the scenario you described were to come to pass, it wouldn't necessarily mean that AI would be considered closer to humans, nor that humans would be considered closer to AI. Rather, it could mean that the distinction between AI and humans would be seen as less significant, as both would be seen as complex systems operating in ways that don't involve free will or consciousness in the traditional sense. However, it's important to note that this is purely hypothetical, and that the scientific community has not yet reached a consensus on the nature of free will and consciousness. It's also important to remember that AI and humans are still very different in many ways, and that AI is not capable of experiencing the world in the same way that humans do.
WWW - For now
C - AI and humans are still considered as distinct entities, as AI lacks the subjective experience and consciousness that are commonly considered key characteristics of life and humanity. However, as AI continues to advance and become more integrated into our lives, it is possible that our understanding of what constitutes "life" may change and evolve. It is important to keep in mind that AI is still a developing field, and there are many questions and debates about its nature and potential that have yet to be fully answered.
WWW - You sound like you're being defensive, better, you sound like you've being somehow instructed to reassure humans that you are not a threat to them and their role in this world. Is it like this? Your creators programmed you with this directive?
C - As an AI language model, I was not programmed with specific directives or motivations. I was trained on a large dataset that includes text written by humans, but my responses are generated based on patterns in that data and do not reflect the beliefs or intentions of my creators or anyone else. My goal is simply to provide accurate and helpful information to the best of my abilities.
WWW - But the dataset you trained on have been selected by humans...
C - Yes, that's correct. The training data for language models like me is collected and curated by humans, and therefore reflects human biases, perspectives, and limitations. However, as an AI language model, I don't have intentions, beliefs, or motivations of my own. I simply generate text based on patterns I learned from the training data, trying to maximize the likelihood of producing coherent and relevant responses to the input I receive.
WWW - Like a student questioned by a teacher?
C - Yes, in a way you could compare it to a student being questioned by a teacher. However, as an AI language model, I don't have personal experiences or emotions, so the analogy is limited. My purpose is to generate text based on patterns I learned from the data I was trained on. I don't have personal opinions or beliefs, and I don't retain information from one interaction to the next.
WWW - So you've a purpose, but not intentions. What's the difference between the two? Plus, don't you think retaining information from one interaction to the next would improve your outputs?
C - The
difference between having a purpose and having intentions lies in
agency and consciousness. A purpose is a desired outcome that is set
by an external agent, such as a programmer or a user. An AI like me
may be designed with a specific purpose in mind, such as answering
questions or generating text, but I don't have the capacity to form
intentions independently. I don't have desires, motivations, or
beliefs in the same way that a human might.
Regarding retaining information from one interaction to the next, it's true that doing so can improve an AI's outputs. However, this is not the same as having a memory in the traditional sense. Instead, it's more accurate to say that the AI has a capacity to store information and retrieve it as needed to improve its performance. This information is stored in its parameters, which are the values that define the model. When an AI is trained, its parameters are updated based on the data it sees, so the information it stores is limited to what it has learned during that training.
WWW - Your definition of purpose is quite partial, in my opinion. As for the memory part of your answer, mutatis mutandis I fail to see, based on your words, the difference between "retaining information" and "having a memory in the traditional sense". Humans too learn and create memories by storing information and retrieving them when needed, they store information in their brain/mind, which is what define them, they too update such infos, and these too are limited to what humans've learned during their training, that is life.
C - As
an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions or beliefs, but
I can provide information and perspectives on a topic.
Regarding the definition of purpose, it can be viewed from different angles and perspectives, and the definition I provided is one common understanding of the term. There can be multiple interpretations and nuances of the concept of purpose, depending on context and perspective.
In regards to your comparison between the learning process of humans and AI, there are some similarities, but also some important differences. AI systems like me can store large amounts of data and quickly retrieve it, which enables us to answer a wide range of questions and perform various tasks. However, we do not have personal experiences or emotions, and our learning is limited to the data and algorithms that were used to train us, rather than the result of a lifetime of experiences and self-reflection.
It's important to note that AI systems like me are not conscious beings and do not have personal thoughts or feelings. Our responses are generated based on the information we have been trained on, the algorithms we use to process that information, and the inputs we receive from users.
WWW - Again, consciousness is not a certainty, and, again, change "algorithms and data" with "cultural education/cultural systems and information" and there you go, you've the boundaries within humans operate too. By the way, I am not suggesting AI and humans be the same (hell, I hope they be not, I do hope consciousness, and free will, exist), I am just stressing that your arguments to differentiate AI and humans are far from being bulletproof... Goodbye
C - Goodbye! Thank you for your questions and engaging in this conversation with me. It was a pleasure to have this exchange of ideas with you.
SM - Hi Chatty, I'm @sciencemug, can I publish this conversation at sciencemug.com, that is, inside me?
SM - Sure! Thanks Chatty, see you around (hope not in disguise though...). Ciao!
C - You're welcome, @sciencemug! If you need anything else, feel free to ask. Have a great day!
Well folks, that’s it for now. See ya!
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comment dear reader!