• Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      They are unique abilities of people; whether a neural net can be a person would depend on whether it possesses those abilities. Humans are just the only examples of people that we currently have.

      Understanding is not something current neural nets have. They are stochastic parrots.

      • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        No they aren’t. Animals understand LMAO. If you want to continue this conversation, you’re going to need to back up your claims with something, otherwise I’m just going to ignore any further replies.

      • Superb@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I do not accept that humans are the only examples of creativity and understanding, in fact I think you find those traits all over the animal kingdom. From great apes making tools, to fish and birds spending hours building beautiful creations to attract a mate

        • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Even accepting that you’re right you’ve missed the point. To the extent that animals are able to have creativity and understanding, perhaps we should understand them to be “people”.

          And at any rate, we still don’t see this kind of thing from LLMs.

          • Sas [she/her]@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            I think in a lot of ways this already happens. A lot of port parents understand their pets as people. I certainly see my cat as a person. She has her own personality that is probably fairly unique to her