Comment Re:They distilled human knowledge (Score 1) 108
> it's a question of the broad strokes of how conclusions are reached on forward processing.
I think it's uncontroversial that in the wide sense of the word think, what the brain does, cognition, or neural processes, is not at all like what computers do including LLMs.
Forward processing, in my opinion, doesn't change that. The computer processes involved can be referred to as thinking but it is only in an anthropomorphic sense that doesn't actually transfer over to human thinking except maybe as a convenient labeling shortcut.
It's kind of like when I explain to my family in general terms what a computer is doing, I'll sometimes use the word think anthropomorphically but in fact, under the hood, the processes I'm referring are not of the brain processes kind but rather they're of the mechanical thermostat kind.
So when the author wrote,
"Progress in AI is birthing a new kind of intelligence, reminiscent of our own in some ways but entirely alien in others. Understanding the nature of this intelligence is a profound scientific challenge, which has the potential to reshape our conception of what it means to *think* "
isn't he engaging, maybe inadvertently, in misdirection or in some kind of gaslighting ?