Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod) header
Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod) profile picture

Resident writing consultant at the Copenhagen Business School Library.

Copenhagen, Denmark
Joined August 2017
Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)Photo by Thomas Basbøll (@Inframethod)
Caesar non supra grammaticos.
1
71
For the record, I don't think it's true that ChatGPT can "process information, reason, discuss [it's own] functioning, and describe experiences." I know for certain it's not subjectively conscious. If OpenAI is telling it to tell us otherwise, they're telling it to lie to us.
Update: seems like GPT-6 finally accords with OpenAI's own model spec re: communicating uncertainty about consciousness (from some very quick tests on web only). Positive update, nice work @w01fe and team.
1
193
Always good to remind yourself that both the ambitions and the complaints come from a normal distribution of sentiments among a diverse student body. You will always assign *both* too much and too little reading.
I’ve seen a few people saying that this indicates that students today wants to be held to higher standards. I’d absolutely love this to be true, but I’ve already gotten complaints that I assign too much reading this semester, and I assign way less than I’d like.
6
344
My worry is that in five years there's going to be a very established group of "experts" who are willing to admit that they don't know whether our AI systems are now conscious and have the authority to declare those of us who are quite certain that they're not "kooks".
This is important. @jeffrsebo is saying, not that we don't know definitely *today* whether AI systems *will be* conscious in five years, but that *in five years* "we're not gonna know" for sure. FWIW, I think we'll as definitely know what we know today and knew five years ago.
5
2
1
3
338
It's interesting that "balanced, thoughtful, both/and" thinking is so popular in these emerging expert communities. To me, it feels very "artificial"; it feels like a *simulation* of thought, rather than the difficult business of making up your mind.
1
23
I'm sure most them will be entirely sincere.
My worry is that in five years there's going to be a very established group of "experts" who are willing to admit that they don't know whether our AI systems are now conscious and have the authority to declare those of us who are quite certain that they're not "kooks".
1
1
130
This is important. @jeffrsebo is saying, not that we don't know definitely *today* whether AI systems *will be* conscious in five years, but that *in five years* "we're not gonna know" for sure. FWIW, I think we'll as definitely know what we know today and knew five years ago.
A video of this fireside chat is now online! We cover a lot of ground in a half hour, discussing AI agency, sentience, and moral status; AI safety, control, and alignment; and how companies, governments, and individuals can help reduce AI risks. share.descript.com/view/V6hl…
1
267
Culture is implicated in nature.
Replying to @contxt_matters
I agree with this. I think it's fine to think of elephants as "cultured" (it seems pretty clear, for example, that they grieve.) Also, humans are mostly machine and animal (we are natural beings too). We can, perhaps, think of culture as way of "folding" nature.
1
2
73
Evolution, the whole story: from solvent to sapient.
In nature, the machine is continuous with the animal, from the lever to the lion--causal, wild. Culture makes the difference. Imagination separates the concept from the emotion, the intellect from the will, reason from the passions. It imposes discipline and grants our freedom.
1
68
In nature, the machine is continuous with the animal, from the lever to the lion--causal, wild. Culture makes the difference. Imagination separates the concept from the emotion, the intellect from the will, reason from the passions. It imposes discipline and grants our freedom.
I lean on intellection *and* volition, reason *and* passion, and I don't think you can have one in any recognizable sense without the other. Animals are continuous with machines; that's nature, from lever to lion. Human culture (concept *and* emotion) makes the difference.
1
2
2
3
359
I lean on intellection *and* volition, reason *and* passion, and I don't think you can have one in any recognizable sense without the other. Animals are continuous with machines; that's nature, from lever to lion. Human culture (concept *and* emotion) makes the difference.
There's probably not a knockdown argument here, but I feel like there's a kind of dilemma for anthropocentrism. If you lean heavily on intellection, human value ends up continuous with machines. If you lean heavily on experience, human value ends up continuous with animals.
1
1
5
300
AI does not understand the universe. It's just another thing in the universe that we have to understand.
Well, "the frontier of understanding the universe" is the skin (cf. Quine). AI stands in the same relation to this frontier as the telescope.
3
105
My longstanding advice to ethnographers: stop thinking about the analysis as primarily a presentation of your data and approach it instead as an attempt to represent the people you have studied. (Link in next post.)
1
4
261
Well, "the frontier of understanding the universe" is the skin (cf. Quine). AI stands in the same relation to this frontier as the telescope.
It seems very likely that humans will never again lead the frontier of understanding the universe.
1
1
1
3
375
"In whatever manner and by whatever means a mode of knowledge may relate to objects, intuition is that through which it takes less than an hour to develop them, and to which all thought as a means is directed.”
Today I was reminded there is a place in downtown Montreal called Kant 1 Hour Photo
1
53