I think it’s likely because the AI-boosters have been making the argument that we’re in an echo chamber and closed minded (we aren’t, we’re factually correct), or that we “can’t define sentience” (we can, it’s very easy, and they get real butthurt when you do it).
That dynamic encourages us to make unnecessary concessions in an attempt to appear more “civil” or “open minded”.
Gotta resist the urge to put on the kid gloves and stand on business tho. These people arent arguing in good faith, and they are undeserving of any grace.
If some n00b wants to call me a ludite or something thats fine, but I’m gonna respond by intellectually pantsing them, and exposing them as bitchmade technocucks who believe in shit they have no understanding of.
Fuck playing nice, don’t take the bait, lol
edit: if you look at the replies to this comment, this is the only strategy they can conjure to push back against logic - bad faith semantic arguments that flippantly ignore well-established definitions of common words.
It basically means “capable of experiencing feelings”
You don’t honestly believe that the plausibilistic text generator is capable of experiencing feelings or emotions do you?
You know what an LLM will do if you spin one up, (bringing it “to life” in your warped perceptions) and then don’t prompt it?
Fucking nothing, because it’s software. Shitty software at that.
Try it at home if you don’t believe me, just try not to forget to breathe while your mind is occupied.
sentience noun
1: a sentient quality or state
2: feeling or sensation as distinguished from perception and thought
What… is this a joke? These are so non-specific and generic. With this as criteria you could argue for anything being sentient, and nothing being sentient. This is useless.
Ahh, so you find the use of the root word of sentience to be non-specific?
I’m not sure if you know this, but on the internet dictionary, you can click on the other blue words if you don’t understand them, and it will show you their definitions too!
Then you just have to mentally concatenate the knowledge. I’ll help walk you through it this time. The root word you need help with is “sentient” (at least I think that’s the whole of it, but if you also don’t understand any of the other words in that definition just let me know and I’ll break them down).
Capable of sensing or feeling: concious of or responsive to the sensations of seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, or feeling
Aware
Finely sensitive in perception or feeling
So that means sentience (noun) is:
A quality or state of being able to feel, or perceive feeling
Feeling or sesation as distinguished from perception and thought
Ok, so now, do you think that the slop generation software program is able to feel? Do you think the software program is aware? Do you think the software program is finely sensitive in perception or feeling?
Follow up question, Do you have any foundational conception of what a computer is, or what software does?
It basically means “capable of experiencing feelings”
You don’t honestly believe that the plausibilistic text generator is capable of experiencing feelings or emotions do you?
You know what an LLM will do if you spin one up, (bringing it “to life” in your warped perceptions) and then don’t prompt it?
Fucking nothing, because it’s software. Shitty software at that.
Try it at home if you don’t believe me, just try not to forget to breathe while your mind is occupied.
I was always under the impression that it’s a complex combination of feelings, perception, experiences, cognition, and self-awareness. Not one simple yes/no definition. Y’know, like what the human brain (and we’re seeing more, nonhuman animals’ brains) does, but stochastic spicy autocomplete never can do.
It’s a word, it is linguistic by nature. I would grant that it is not as simple of a concept as being “alive”, but, like all words it does have a set definition and meaning.
Your definition is basically correct, but I disagree that possesion of sentience is more than a yes or no.
There are cases where it is unclear if a life posses sentience, like a jellyfish for example. The great majority of animals do have sentience, I don’t understand why the belief that animals don’t experience emotions and sensations is so prevalent while being so easily disproven. Perhaps it makes them easier to eat.
You are 1000% correct that shitty slop-generation software cannot be sentient tho.
I think it’s likely because the AI-boosters have been making the argument that we’re in an echo chamber and closed minded (we aren’t, we’re factually correct), or that we “can’t define sentience” (we can, it’s very easy, and they get real butthurt when you do it).
That dynamic encourages us to make unnecessary concessions in an attempt to appear more “civil” or “open minded”.
Gotta resist the urge to put on the kid gloves and stand on business tho. These people arent arguing in good faith, and they are undeserving of any grace.
If some n00b wants to call me a ludite or something thats fine, but I’m gonna respond by intellectually pantsing them, and exposing them as bitchmade technocucks who believe in shit they have no understanding of.
Fuck playing nice, don’t take the bait, lol
edit: if you look at the replies to this comment, this is the only strategy they can conjure to push back against logic - bad faith semantic arguments that flippantly ignore well-established definitions of common words.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentience
Computers do not experience feelings, and one’s inability to grasp the reality of that fact does not change it.
Hold on, there is a widely accepted definition of sentience?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentience
It basically means “capable of experiencing feelings”
You don’t honestly believe that the plausibilistic text generator is capable of experiencing feelings or emotions do you?
You know what an LLM will do if you spin one up, (bringing it “to life” in your warped perceptions) and then don’t prompt it? Fucking nothing, because it’s software. Shitty software at that.
Try it at home if you don’t believe me, just try not to forget to breathe while your mind is occupied.
What… is this a joke? These are so non-specific and generic. With this as criteria you could argue for anything being sentient, and nothing being sentient. This is useless.
Ahh, so you find the use of the root word of sentience to be non-specific?
I’m not sure if you know this, but on the internet dictionary, you can click on the other blue words if you don’t understand them, and it will show you their definitions too!
Then you just have to mentally concatenate the knowledge. I’ll help walk you through it this time. The root word you need help with is “sentient” (at least I think that’s the whole of it, but if you also don’t understand any of the other words in that definition just let me know and I’ll break them down).
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient
Sentient (adjective) -
Capable of sensing or feeling: concious of or responsive to the sensations of seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, or feeling
Aware
Finely sensitive in perception or feeling
So that means sentience (noun) is:
A quality or state of being able to feel, or perceive feeling
Feeling or sesation as distinguished from perception and thought
Ok, so now, do you think that the slop generation software program is able to feel? Do you think the software program is aware? Do you think the software program is finely sensitive in perception or feeling?
Follow up question, Do you have any foundational conception of what a computer is, or what software does?
I was also unaware of this…
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentience
It basically means “capable of experiencing feelings”
You don’t honestly believe that the plausibilistic text generator is capable of experiencing feelings or emotions do you?
You know what an LLM will do if you spin one up, (bringing it “to life” in your warped perceptions) and then don’t prompt it? Fucking nothing, because it’s software. Shitty software at that.
Try it at home if you don’t believe me, just try not to forget to breathe while your mind is occupied.
I don’t mean linguistically.
I was always under the impression that it’s a complex combination of feelings, perception, experiences, cognition, and self-awareness. Not one simple yes/no definition. Y’know, like what the human brain (and we’re seeing more, nonhuman animals’ brains) does, but stochastic spicy autocomplete never can do.
It’s a word, it is linguistic by nature. I would grant that it is not as simple of a concept as being “alive”, but, like all words it does have a set definition and meaning.
Your definition is basically correct, but I disagree that possesion of sentience is more than a yes or no.
There are cases where it is unclear if a life posses sentience, like a jellyfish for example. The great majority of animals do have sentience, I don’t understand why the belief that animals don’t experience emotions and sensations is so prevalent while being so easily disproven. Perhaps it makes them easier to eat.
You are 1000% correct that shitty slop-generation software cannot be sentient tho.
Yes, it’s in the dictionary with all of the other widely accepted definitions in the English language.
Would you like a hyperlink or would you prefer to remain ignorant?
Please do.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient
Wow.
I know, it’s so simple, crazy