The human brain is not a machine - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号)。如果该手机号尚未注册,将自动创建 FT中文网账号。短信可能需要几分钟送达,验证码15分钟内有效,请耐心等待:
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议和隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
人工智能

The human brain is not a machine

This common comparison invites us to see ourselves as sub-optimal alternatives to AI agents
00:00

{"text":[[{"start":5.25,"text":"The temptation to see the human brain as a kind of machine has been around for a long time. Marvin Minsky, a pioneer in artificial intelligence, used to provocatively call humans “meat machines”. Going further back, one analogy from the pre-computer era described the brain as an “enchanted loom where millions of flashing shuttles weave a dissolving pattern”, as the science writer Michael Pollan describes in his new book A World Appears. "}],[{"start":33.45,"text":"So it is no surprise that some people at the forefront of AI now believe their models could soon become conscious. If the brain is akin to a computer, then why wouldn’t a super-powerful computer develop consciousness too?"}],[{"start":46.550000000000004,"text":"This is fuzzy territory for technologists to wade into, not least because nobody can agree on what consciousness is, let alone how and why it arises. Indeed, Pollan concluded his 280-page attempt to unravel the “hard problem of consciousness” by admitting that he knew less at the end than he did at the start."}],[{"start":67.4,"text":"But rather than our new machines ascending to reach truly humanlike qualities, my fear is that we will steadily lower that bar by losing faith in who we are and becoming more like machines ourselves."}],[{"start":80.15,"text":"In the spirit of Minsky, a recent article by the economist Tyler Cowen argued that there was “no ghost in the machine” but that “perhaps more importantly, there is barely a ‘ghost’ in your own human machine” because our brains make a lot of decisions without our being conscious of them. "}],[{"start":95.15,"text":"I think Cowen’s tongue was firmly in his cheek when he said we should “downgrade our own sense of self”, but the same cannot be said for Sam Altman of OpenAI, who has defended the energy consumption of AI models by pointing out that it “takes a lot of energy to train a human” too. “It takes about 20 years of life — and all the food you consume during that time — before you become smart.”"}],[{"start":117.85000000000001,"text":"Elon Musk, meanwhile, sees some inherent human characteristics as weaknesses to be warded against. “Beware the empathy exploit,” he has written on his social media platform X — an “exploit” being a term from cyber security to describe a piece of code that takes advantage of a vulnerability in a system. “Empathy is good and right when thought through (deep), but can be deadly to civilisation when simply stimulus-response (shallow).”"}],[{"start":145.3,"text":"This habit of comparing humans to machines invites us to see ourselves as sub-optimal alternatives to intelligent robots or AI agents: too weak; too emotional; not indefatigable enough. Although many of those claims are not yet actually true (many humanoid robots need to recharge after a few hours, for example), it is already possible to see this mindset seeping in for some employers. Take Standard Chartered’s chief executive, who recently spoke about replacing “lower-value human capital with the financial capital and investment capital we’re putting in”. "}],[{"start":178.65,"text":"His remarks caused a widespread backlash. But I think many of us have accidentally become complicit in this framing by adopting certain machine-like expectations for ourselves. We buy endless books about how to maximise our productivity. We strap gadgets to our wrists in order to measure and “optimise” ourselves. Even when we buy books about how to stop, they seemingly have to be couched in the promise of greater productivity. Alex Soojung-Kim Pang’s book Rest, for example, has the subtitle: “Why you get more done when you work less.” Indeed, even our language of resistance often depicts us as machines. We say we need to “switch off” or to “disconnect” in order to “recharge our batteries” before we “burn out”."}],[{"start":224.75,"text":"But humans are not very much like machines — and that includes our brains. A number of scientists now argue that the “computer” metaphor is not a useful way to understand its immensely complex interrelated biological workings, which are more akin to “the murmurations of starlings”, as the neuroscientist Luiz Pessoa has put it. As for consciousness, some believe it arises from the dialogue between the body and brain. In this framing, our mortality and ability to feel are not flaws or “exploits” to be warded off, but the secret to who we are."}],[{"start":258.9,"text":"It doesn’t have to be a competition, of course. Humans and AI systems are both powerful, but in fundamentally different ways. In an ideal world, we would use these tools to extend our reach to achieve new things. But if we allow ourselves to be compared to machines, I fear we will come to expect too much of ourselves in some ways, and too little in others."}],[{"start":287.25,"text":""}]],"url":"https://audio.ftcn.net.cn/album/a_1782090882_1871.mp3"}

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

英伟达董事会的虚假独立性

治理话题令人犯困。

中国科技股大幅回落,投资AI或许少些波折

中国的机遇同样蕴藏在AI供应链的“卖铲人”环节。

英伟达的个人崇拜注定不会善终

值得留意企业傲慢自大的警讯——这往往意味着坏事即将发生。

无根之人最终赢了

人们或许不会投票支持自由个人主义,但他们践行着它。

耗资5亿美元的罗摩衍那押注全球成功

宝莱坞史上成本最高的电影更看重CGI视觉奇观,而非精神震撼——但要收回成本,或许还得靠奇迹。

我们很快就能治愈癌症吗?

近期,药物预防和治疗领域的革命性进展让科学家距离战胜这些最令人恐惧的疾病仅一步之遥,但棘手的挑战依然存在。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×