• SpiderShoeCult@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    10 months ago

    if you think about selection bias, namely that one normally chooses to surround oneself with like-minded people and if you add the fact that people would normally not consider themselves non-sapient, it sort of makes sense though, dunnit?

    family, true, you don’t choose that, but I figure statistically people are more likely to have some strong feelings about their family and implications towards themselves if they admit their family is indeed non-sapient (though blood ties are a different topic, best left undisturbed in this context)

    for the record I never said MY friends and family, I was instructing the other commenter to look beyond their own circle. I figured since they were so convinced that the average human was not, in fact, about as dumb as an LLM, their social circle skews their statistics a bit.

    • Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      human beings are smart. bad things don’t happen because people are stupid. this kind of thinking is dehumanising and leads to so much evil in our world. people are not LLMs. they’re people like you. they have thoughts. they act for reasons. don’t dehumanise them.

        • SpiderShoeCult@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          ummm, you’re the only one here that made any assumption about the sapience of developmentally disabled people, no idea where or why that came from

          I would expect the people in your social circle to be sapient according to yourself, please see my initial point about selecting the ones you surround yourself with

          tic-tac-toe is a solved game, so it would be expected for a computer to always win or tie, that says more about the game itself though

      • SpiderShoeCult@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I would point you to Hanlon’s razor for the first part there.

        it’s not about dehumanizing, it’s merely comparing the outputs. it doesn’t really matter if they act for reasons or have thoughts if the output is the same. should we be more forgiving if a LLM outputs crap because it’s just a tool or should we be more forgiving if the human outputs the exact same crap, because it’s a person?

        and, just for fun, to bring solipsism into this, how do we actually know that they have thoughts?

    • Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      shit, find me the stupidest dog you know and i’ll show a being that is leagues beyond a fucking chatbot’s capabilities. it can want things in the world, and it can act of its own volition to obtain those things. a chatbot is nothing. it’s noise. fuck that. if you can’t see it it’s because you don’t know to look at the world.