I tried to find some concrete exposition in the paper of what the authors mean by key words such as “organism”, “agent”, and so on, but to me the whole paper is fog. Not AI-generated fog, as far as I can tell, but a human sort of fog, the fog of philosophers.
Then I found this in the last paragraph of section 3:
The problem is that such algorithmic systems have no freedom from immediacy, since all their outputs are determined entirely—even though often in intricate and probabilistic ways—by the inputs of the system. There are no actions that emanate from the historicity of internal organization.
Well, that just sinks it. All the LLMs have bags of “historicity of internal organization”, that being their gigabytes of weights, learned from their training, not to mention the millions of tokens worth of context window that one might call “short-term historicity of internal organization”.
The phrase “historicity of internal organization” seems to be an obfuscated way of saying “memory”.
Thanks. So would you say I am right with the concern about the paper? Or is it fog only for other reasons?
[I haven’t yet read the link, so I don’t yet know what exactly fog in this context means]
I tried to find some concrete exposition in the paper of what the authors mean by key words such as “organism”, “agent”, and so on, but to me the whole paper is fog. Not AI-generated fog, as far as I can tell, but a human sort of fog, the fog of philosophers.
Then I found this in the last paragraph of section 3:
Well, that just sinks it. All the LLMs have bags of “historicity of internal organization”, that being their gigabytes of weights, learned from their training, not to mention the millions of tokens worth of context window that one might call “short-term historicity of internal organization”.
The phrase “historicity of internal organization” seems to be an obfuscated way of saying “memory”.
Thanks. So would you say I am right with the concern about the paper? Or is it fog only for other reasons? [I haven’t yet read the link, so I don’t yet know what exactly fog in this context means]