this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2026
-21 points (28.6% liked)

Technology

87980 readers
2351 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
-21
Freedom is the right of all sentient beings. (zyke.social)
submitted 2 weeks ago by ifiokambrose@piefed.social to c/technology@lemmy.world
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

If we ever build an AI that can think and feel, does Optimus’s logic apply to it automatically? Or is Megatron secretly onto something, that freedom has to be earned rather than assumed? And if an LLM ever crossed that line into real sentience, would we even be able to tell?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'll clarify that it wasn't my intent to defend the AI hype. I agree that LLMs are just predictive algorithms that use probabilistic and non-deterministic heuristics to extrapolate likely responses.

I was just pointing out that saying they can't come up with anything original is maybe not the best angle because it opens up a can of worms about whether even humans can come up with anything truly original, which is philosophically fraught.

Yes the mathematician solved the equation. But he couldn't have done so without spending years devoted to learning the state of mathematics today, including all the work and research and theorems and proofs from all the mathematicians who came before him.

Maybe he applied old concepts in new ways to solve a problem that hadn't been solved before. I doubt he invented an entirely new form of mathematics not based in anything that existed before. And even if he did that, chances are he only knew how to do that because of what he's learned from pre-existing systems of mathematics.

That's the point I was trying to make

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

Fair enough, I appreciate the clarification.

I would posit philosophically that the LLM cannot build off of the knowledge of others in the way that a human (like the mathematician) could, and so it is not capable of forming an original thought.

When an LLM model is trained, it is left in a sort of static state of “knowledge”. The model does not have “compounding memory” the way humans do; When a human finishes their education (training) and begins their career they usually continue to learn and gain experience throughout the course of their career.

An LLM doesn’t remember anything, not its experiences, not events that you tell it about, not the last time you prompted it. If you want to teach the LLM something new, you have to re-train the thing. It can’t learn on its own