n.b. It (and I, above) do *not* say it claims that Claude is conscious.

**Intelligence**. Yes, good point: by my working definition, I would see a calculator as slightly intelligent. That seems fair: it helps me think in some particular ways.

If you're ever comfortable sharing your definition of "true" intelligence, I'd be keen to hear.

Thanks for chat!

Your working definition of intelligence means a Casio fx-180Pv's intelligent.

But okay, explain the J-space paper to me. In which way does it prove consciousness in Clause?

On consciousness, q.v. my comments above on Anthropic J-space paper.

On intelligence, my working definition is ≈ some of the thinking I need to do can now be done by an LLM.

Do you see the statement that "LLMs are not intelligent/conscious" as a claim? If so, how do people making it pass your test?

Why do we think I'm intelligent, or conscious, rather than just passing all the tests through mimickry + appropriate regularisation so I can generalise beyond my training data?

They don't take a stance on (the hard problem of) consciousness, merely whether Claude exhibits behaviour predicted by one definition of consciousness.

To me, it seems that, to disagree, we need to show a flaw in their derivations.

3/3

2/n

My preferred approach to both terms is against a definition. Otherwise it seems to me we lose the possibility of making falsifiable statements, leaving us to sling "yes it is!" and "no it isn't!" back and forth.

When an old definition is applied to a new domain, it often needs to be adjusted. Thus, an LLM maxing out an IQ test doesn't lead us to conclude it has a 200+ IQ: it's memorised the training data.

1/n

that doesn't make it OK for philosophers to become propagandists.

5. We've not seen Si-based entities perform like this before: passing Turing tests... That qualifies them, for me, as a new kind of entity.

They're different. The frontier is jagged/spiky/whatever.

For me, that's an invitation to explore, not attack.

1. I see intelligence & consciousness (appropriately defined...) as something that humans have.
2. I see us as large, complex machines, subject to the laws of physics.
3. thus, I see intelligence & consciousness as emergent properties of ion channel mechanics, voltage differences...
4. I have not heard a strong argument as to why these properties can only emerge from C-based, not Si-

I got my Ph. D. in chemistry after graduating near the top of my undergraduate class at a tough school.

Linus Pauling knew more about chemistry on a bad day than I ever learned.

He knew more about chemistry than many if not most of the professors I knew.

He was still very much wrong about vitamin C and its role in human health.

There are lots and lots of very smart people out there who get specific things demonstrably wrong despite their very apparent talents.