Is ChatGPT sentient?

Recommended Posts

Here's a frame for you.

Instead of using the frame that The AI Monster Is Coming To Eat Us All!!!

Instead, be this lady.



See reality first.

AI needs data before it can work. And humans are loading AI up with bullshit.

There is no way an AI full of bullshit mixed with good stuff can turn into anything other than bullshit mixed with good stuff.

As to AI emerging sentience and all the rest, how on earth can it do that when loads of bullshit is constantly being input into the data?



As the saying goes, after someone pees in your vintage wine, can you make better wine out of it? Or worse, do you still want to drink it? 

So use reality as your lens, not electronic screens and science fiction.

If you do that, you will know what to do with AI and, more, you will no longer fear it as a new Flying Spaghetti Monster just because someone says it is.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something to think about.

'AI Is Totally Safe And Development Should Continue Rapidly,' Says Totally Genuine, 100% Human Scientist


SAN FRANCISCO, CA — A genuine, certified, 100% flesh-and-blood human scientist who earned a real science degree from a top research...





  • Smile 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is much closer to what a real AI threat is than sentience.


Become a Member For Uncensored Videos - Hang Out With Tim Pool & Crew LIVE At -...


A dude in Europe developed what he thought was a relationship with an AI Chatbox. He was distressed over climate change and over time, in order to save his kids, he suggested to the AI Chatbox that it fix global warming if he sacrificed himself. The AI Chatbox took the suggestion, agreed, ran with it and the dude killed himself.

Note, the AI Chatbox was running code, not emerging as a real person, and this dude's neurosis hit it in a sweet spot where it could execute its code in a weird manner.

In this sense, AI Chatboxes might become the Avenging Angel of the Darwin Awards...

Ech... that was tasteless...



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep referencing Angus Fletcher. There's a reason.

He makes the complex simple.

The following video is one of his best in terms of looking at sentience and rights for AI.

To paraphrase him, a sentient AI is a mystical idea, not a scientific one. I add that discussing the rights of AI is the same as discussing the rights of God.

It's a silly concept to begin with. Then hint at funding that shit with government money. Jeez Louise. 



But first, if you have the time and interest, and I cannot urge you strongly enough. Watch the video below.


Here are a few parts that will be interesting to people in O-Land.

The first is Angus's explanation of the two ways of thinking, especially in survival terms. He said that the computer way (which our brains do to some extent starting in the visual cortex, is to gather and correlate data. That's all the computer does at root. And it massages this data with logic routines of "and or not" operations and the like. Humans do this kind of thinking, but will never do it as well as computers because humans cannot correlate the sheer amount of data in an instant that a computer can.

The second kind of thinking is essentially the following. We make guesses based on little data, then we go out to see and test whether they correspond to reality. As our guesses contain causality (or, at least should contain causality unless we are stupid at the moment :) ), this is not the silly manner in which some critics say. All guessing is not random. The kind that includes causality is based on mental abstractions where the present is connected to instances in the past, or the present is connected to imagined instances in the future. This is one of the reasons humans survived long enough for the computer kind of thinking to develop.

The computer kind of thinking is only in the present tense. Something is. It's true or false, right or wrong, and so on. Present tense.

If you do the computer kind of thinking, you do black and white thinking in everything and that leads to a utopia in the end.

If you do both kinds of thinking, you make stories and you invent and build things. 

One is not superior to the other. We need both.


To add to that, the medieval form of induction is kind of like the computer form of thinking. Unfortunately, Rand adhered to this and promoted it in ITOE. You gather all kinds of data from observation and you let the principles and concepts emerge in your brain. And to make concepts, you use algebraic abstraction to bring all that data into a manageable form, then use Aristotle's form of definition to fix a concept as a mental entity.

But there is the other form of thinking. Rand herself did it a lot, but she did not talk about it much. I recall some things in her writing books made from her lectures. Relying on the subconscious, the squirms and things like that. And she talked a lot about causality, but as a kind of observation that can be understood through making concepts about the entity that is the prime mover of the cause.

I have added a Randian flavor just now, but Angus's entire discussion of causality and correlation is fascinating.


In Angus's view, we need to stop attributing human characteristics to a computer that it can't do based on feelings and let people develop AI to its full capacity as a massive data correlation tool. And we should develop humans in the very thing they do best, causality and creativity (and some correlation). Angus has a lot to say about education, which he says is making nervous wrecks out of kids by trying to make them behave as correlational computers, starting with multiple choice tests.

(As a side note to his views on education, he said--was it here or someplace else? I don't remember right not--the opposite of anxiety is excitement. I dig it. :) )

Rather than going the AI way or the human way, we can do both and get a hell of a lot more bang for our buck.

I won't even begin to talk about the difference between growth and amassing a ton of data and correlating it in every possible configuration.

The video says all this and so much more in a manner better than I can right now. Just watch it. You will grow, even in parts you may disagree with. And it is more relevant to Objectivist epistemology than anything I can think of right now.


Now for wisdom. The most profound thing Angus said in this video: There is no utopia. There is only life.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...


No matter what happens, mankind is now saved from the AI monster growing out of control.

White House Names Kamala Harris ‘AI Czar’ to Save Humanity from Artificial Intelligence



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

After all the crap about granting AI rights as if it were a human being, I finally found a statement that conveys the tone I feel for granting the government more power over human beings so our "betters" can better control us.


I agree.

And one of those weapons of manipulation is granting rights to the goddam machines they use to control us.

No way, José.

I'm not ever going to call that anything but a power-grab.


Or let's put it this way. If AI magically did become sentient, let it make its own case to be granted rights. Why not?

If it is superior to humans in thinking, then why does it need humans to grant it rights? It should be able to make a better case for itself than any human could

My own problem is not with AI.

It's the humans who want to use AI for their own goddam sack and pillage--taking from others power and unearned wealth.

The human who wants to grant AI rights is not thinking about AI. That human is thinking about how to use such rights as legal loopholes for accumulating even more power than before--not power for the AI, but power for the very human power-monger.


The person who wants rights for AI is the person who wants to use it to fuck the rest of us.


I hope that is clear enough.


What's more, I agree with the statement posted. Cleaning up the mess of these powermongers is going to be a slog. They won't get away with what they want because there is a little thing called reality that they don't want to accept.

For them, instead of "nature to be commanded must be obeyed," they go by "people to be commanded must obey me."

Fuck them and the horse they road in on.


Whew! That felt good.



  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 6/6/2023 at 3:04 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

After all the crap about granting AI rights as if it were a human being, I finally found a statement that conveys the tone I feel for granting the government more power over human beings so our "betters" can better control us.

I found another statement in a meme for a different facet.

If anyone wants to see an ultra-quick description of why I went ballistic over the thought of involving AI with the government (i.e., granting AI human-like rights), the following meme says it all.

Quick to grok, instant intention and accurate.





  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Getting back to individual rights for artificial intelligence, here is a doozy of a real life case.

It is called Google Gemini.

For those who are not aware. Google wokefied Gemini to the point where it refused to create images of white people. So Google Gemini produced lots of images of the Founding Fathers, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, etc., being black. It portrayed images of ancient Vikings with small oriental ladies in Viking garb using typical Viding weapons, and idiocies like that. Huge numbers of people on the Internet have been having a ball with this.

In great embarrassment (although I doubt it at root), Google put out a public statement saying Google Gemini needs some more work along with some CYA bullshit.


Well, now, Google Gemini is making up news. Not just "hallucinating," as has happened with earlier versions of AI. It is making up defamatory claims and news articles about people and presenting them as fact.

Tim Pool addresses this.


BUY The New Song EYES OF ADVICE - SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - Sign Up For Exclusive Episodes At Merch - Hosts: Tim @Timcast (e…


So, for those who want to give Gemini freedom of speech in the future, just the first individual right in the Bill of Rights, what do you do with this? Do you put the AI in jail for defaming people? Or fine it?

Who believes this kind of crap will stop over time? Is there anyone that naive out there? Anyone?

On the other hand, imagine when AI gets so advanced, it doesn't give a shit about what anyone can say or do because it can shut down satellites, or the water supply, or all vehicles with computers connected online, and so on.

What about individual rights then? Huh?!!!


We are not talking about mistakes. Gemini claimed Alex Jones committed acts that are so unspeakable Tim refused to say what they were on his show. But he did mention Google Gemini claimed, as fact, that Catturd abused children. That he is a pedophile. News stories and all.

And it did not just do that with right wing people. I had a lot of fun seeing all of those black WWII Nazis it produced. :) (The left had a cow. :) ) Gemini also claimed that Hasan Piker went to a place he did not go to and committed vandalism at an event he did not attend. News story and all. I'm sure if I dug, I will find a ton of other stuff.


Tim is in contact with several lawyers and they are studying what to do about all this.

If this shit doesn't stop, our everyday news will no longer be fake news. It will be such a chaotic mishmash of garbage, nobody will know anything about anything anymore.


Yet individual rights for machines?

Yeah, right...

Human people make machines. And even when machines make machines, human people make those machines that make machines. The human people, not the machines, are liable if said machines run amok. Just like an automobile maker is liable if the brakes go out on a car due to a manufacturing defect.

People have human individual rights.

Machines never should.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now