Compare commits
2 Commits
b45e2af4dc
...
987e567683
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
987e567683 | ||
|
|
468911c610 |
27
app/priv/blog/engineering/2026/05-08-ai-zombies.md
Normal file
27
app/priv/blog/engineering/2026/05-08-ai-zombies.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
|
||||
%{
|
||||
title: "AI Zombies",
|
||||
author: "Willem van den Ende",
|
||||
tags: ~w(AI Reflection),
|
||||
description: "In which the writer reflects on believing AI is conscious",
|
||||
published: false
|
||||
}
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
I wrote this on LinkedIn, reposting Stuart-Winter-Tear:
|
||||
|
||||
I've seen very smart people see patterns where there are none. I like my systems as much as the next person, and LLMs can achieve much more than I'd expect from next token prediction. But this requires a proper harness and people operating it with both feet on the ground (and not their head in a methane powered cloud, but I digress ;-) ). Stuart Winter-Tear's short piece is well worth reading. "[..]our confidence in recognising consciousness rests on shakier ground than we like to admit."
|
||||
|
||||
It may look conscious to you, but it is still a next token predictor in a harness.
|
||||
|
||||
How can you prevent falling into this?
|
||||
----
|
||||
|
||||
There is no failsafe recipe, I am afraid. One thing that can help is a rule of thumb I found in Matteo Vaccari's blog:
|
||||
|
||||
Read all the markdown that you adopt.
|
||||
|
||||
This is also a great way to reduce the number of things to try out. I've seen some repositories with a lot of markdown, and a general prompt, and then you can put your question or your writing to an agent to get perspectives.
|
||||
|
||||
There usually is too much text in these repositories, so I give up reading and put the repository aside. I want skill augmentation, not cognitive offloading.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user