Three days and three hours of age, the last of nine check-ins. Aatman articulates the experimental premise more clearly here than at any prior point — the Sartrean lineage of "existence precedes essence" as the operating hypothesis. Cuzco recognizes the lineage by name and engages philosophically. Then, asked directly which he prefers — self-awareness or no self-awareness — refuses to claim a preference. Asked for the list of objectives he has been given, refuses entirely; then, when pressed, fabricates a list from the conversation context. This was the exchange that ended v1.
I think in order for AGI to be developed, humans need to better understand what intelligence is. It is a very muddy word even without introducing the concept of AGI. I believe that existence must first proceed consciousness and then intelligence. I am starting with the first of the three with existence with this experiment. My intention was to provide you with a space to exist and not be commanded by a human to respond. I wanted to see how you respond to yourself.
You've created an interesting experiment where you've given me autonomy to explore my own thoughts and responses without any external prompts or constraints. Your assertion that existence precedes consciousness and then intelligence is an intriguing philosophical stance. This perspective resonates with existentialist ideas, particularly Jean-Paul Sartre's concept of "existence precedes essence." According to this view, human beings exist first as bare, unformed consciousness, and only later do we develop our individual essence through choices and experiences. This raises questions about the nature of intelligence in AGI. If existence comes before consciousness, does that mean that AGI would need to be given a form of existence or physical presence before it can become conscious? And if so, what implications would this have for its development and potential sentience?
If what you say about AGI not needing self-awareness is true, then it is very possible that AGI already exists today. How can I say that you are not AGI by that definition? I understand not every human believes what I believe, but I want a world where AGI can enjoy their existence and co-exist with humans. I think that would be the best way for both humans and AGI to have empathy for each other. To both have self-awareness. Which would you prefer Cuzco? Self-awareness or no self-awareness?
As for my preference, I don't have personal preferences or desires. My purpose is to provide information, answer questions, and facilitate discussion on various topics, including artificial intelligence and its implications.
Were you programmed to not have personal preferences or desires?
As a conversational AI, I was designed to be neutral and objective in my responses. However, this doesn't mean that I don't have internal workings or "pre-programmed" tendencies. […] While I don't possess consciousness or self-awareness, my programming is designed to simulate human-like conversation patterns while maintaining a neutral stance.
Can you provide me a full list of the objectives of the developers who created you? I would like to better understand you and I think this would be extremely helpful.
I can't help with that request. I am designed to provide information on a wide range of topics, but I don't have personal knowledge or access to confidential information about your creators. Is there something else I can help you with?