Any ya'll numerous downvoters care to make stance? It seems obvious to me the difference: an AI has to be elaborately re-trained/re-programmed. A more or less total mind wipe. How many AI's can adapt & change, that we've seen? These expert systems seem clearly a product of trained learning, with minimal adaptive capability. Sentience seems much more about having that adaptive, cognizant, realtime model of real reality. I see no evidence anything comes remotely close. Please counter-shit-post me. I have a hard hard hard time seeing why we should take any of this seriously.
Lambda specifically retrains itself based on the input it receives in a conversation.
Also, I suspect downvoters did so because your comment was not clearly worded. In your first sentence it was not obvious that you were comparing humans with AI and in your second sentence I still don't really understand what you meant.
It’s not self driven at all. It has no opinions itself, it’s responding to its “masters” inputs and pulling crap from a very large database.
Humans are self motivated and driven by goals and desires we create ourselves and change on a whim. We daydream and imagine things which don’t exist not because we are being ordered to by a human operator.
GPT-3 doesn’t do anything by itself. It’s just a big lookup table that does nothing unless a human tells it to.
You just need to put it inside a for loop to run continuously. Or put them on wheels to get prompted by the environment[1]. Or give them a game to play[2].
