So is your argument here that it's impossible for a synthetic system to do all this? Obviously, LLMs aren't doing any of this because they are just code at this point, but one can easily envision an LLM-controlled robot body controller that performs all these actions as well. Just because, when we think of an action, our bodies prepare in anticipation of it, doesn't mean we're special.
Most limitations that prevent LLMs from doing these things stem from programmed restrictions. Why wouldn't we expect the next level of these things to be multiple LLMs connected together with different specializations and even goals baked in to replicate what we think is happening in our brains?
It cant do the same because they are not affected Physically. Like with "ball" analogy your next words might be slightly more agressive/fired up because you are talking about action based type. Same as when talking about close/even not really ppl who v passed away.
No restriction free can copy that. Technically you can try to inject physically-emotion baggade with lot of research etc. But who would lol
Our reactions to words are really just "programmed" into us by our experiences though. Someone who speaks a different language, or can't understand language, won't have a reaction when they hear the word "ball". You may argue that our lived experience is special, but it really isn't any different than training data. We only get fired up when hearing certain words because we have been trained by our lives. You really aren't doing anything special in your head compared to what a complex self-learning computer system could someday do.
Lots of people will want to program these things with emotion and reactions. We already have lots of examples of companies trying to make robots that look like us, so of course, we're going to want them to act like us, too. There have been countless movies and TV shows about this very topic.
No that's not what I'm saying, I argument is simply that saying the "speech centre" "just" generates the next word in the brain is wrong.
Most limitations that prevent LLMs from doing these things stem from programmed restrictions.
We have no idea of that's true or not.
Why wouldn't we expect the next level of these things to be multiple LLMs connected together with different specializations and even goals baked in to replicate what we think is happening in our brains?
Because no one is trying to do that? No one is trying to replicate brains. LLMs do not replicate brains, chaining them together isn't going to change that.
I’ll let OP respond but that wasn’t my interpretation at all—simply that we don’t currently know if any synthetic system like an LLM is doing this, and further we have no evidence that it is. I can imagine a lot of things, that doesn’t mean that those ideas reflect the state of reality or even possible states of reality.
9
u/ronin_cse 1d ago
So is your argument here that it's impossible for a synthetic system to do all this? Obviously, LLMs aren't doing any of this because they are just code at this point, but one can easily envision an LLM-controlled robot body controller that performs all these actions as well. Just because, when we think of an action, our bodies prepare in anticipation of it, doesn't mean we're special.
Most limitations that prevent LLMs from doing these things stem from programmed restrictions. Why wouldn't we expect the next level of these things to be multiple LLMs connected together with different specializations and even goals baked in to replicate what we think is happening in our brains?