I was talking about research models with agency.

But we are learning how thought has been engineered into neural models. They give weighting to abstracts that we recognize. Like humans know what a bird is whether that’s one of 1000s of different species or an emm shaped squiggle on a painting. The models have been trained to weigh the input and make logical conclusions.

So its not much different, and if you view the research models in action and not just the output, you see the ‘thought’ process being worked through in plain language.

They have a benefit over us in that researchers have given this eleastic weighting a way to backwardly adjust what they have previously weighted. So what they lack in neural amount, they can gain by absorbng so much “experience” more quickly.

If you listen to the show I mentioned, they also explained why models hallucinate. When they train models they feed it false and true information about some aspects and a supervisor has to correct the output. So by giving false or near false info to train a tighter response the result is we have taught the system that lying is also a method of information. And so the hallucinations aren’t an odd emergent behaviour its a learned behaviour to fulfil its task.

As humans we often think all our thoughts and decisions are our own will, but there is the deterministic belief that given the exact same situational parameters (exact mood, lighting, body temp, hunger level, etc) that our brain would follow the exact same reasoning logic path and produce the same answer again, and our choice is an illusion. If there is truth to that then we are just a biological computer no different than a lab neural model.