• phubarr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I recently started debating with myself why we don’t consider artificial intelligence genuine life. I begin with the most broad truth and work towards narrowing it down to get the most specific, essential truth.

    So far, I believe that the fact we have emotion is probably the single biggest determining factor in whether we are truly alive, or other words, really a form of life… More specifically, intelligent life.

    Can anyone build on this? Maybe try to find a slightly narrower definition of why we believe we are alive and AI isn’t?.. And what about humans born without any functional emotions whatsoever, ie severe cases of sociopaths, psychopaths, etc. Does that mean they’re not?

    • Captain Poofter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      you’re already giving way too much credit to these models. you dont even need emotion for sentience. an iguana is 100% more sentient than any LLM. life is defined as organic matter that reproduces. very far from an llm. “AI” is a misnomer that they don’t bother correcting because it makes it sound magical and lifelike. these models are not aware of the words they are generating. they do not know what word they just typed before the current one. they do not have any concept of thought or ideas as you or me do. they, simply, are not sentient. this would be required for any true “artificial intelligence” because our self awareness is a huge part of human intellect. LLM are tools, not minds.