Training humans. Training AI.

Any discussion of LLM‘s will eventually include some reference to training. Positive aspects as well as the negatives always seem to point back to how the LLM was trained. I’ve been pondering how that is different from how humans are “trained.” Eventually, I suppose a human child will take over its own learning experience. But isn’t that likely where we’re headed with LLM‘s?

I put that question to ChatGPT and, as so often happens, a lengthy discussion ensued, touching on what it means for an LLM to “trust” and should human trust be considered superior, which led to the concepts of self and free will.

Two of my favorite “-isms”

Anyone who knows me knows of my interest in consciousness and reality (see tags below for more). When it comes to understanding reality, I’m gonna go with one of the following. (or some combination.)

Monism is the view that all reality is fundamentally one substance or principle. Everything in the universe is ultimately the same kind of thing. This can be physical (everything is matter) or mental (everything is mind), or something else entirely.

Panpsychism, on the other hand, is the idea that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of the universe. According to panpsychism, all things have some form of consciousness or experience, even if it’s very basic, down to the smallest particles.

So, while both can be viewed as “unifying” theories, monism is about the nature of reality being one substance, whereas panpsychism is about consciousness being fundamental and present everywhere.

Your decisions don’t matter

After 20 years of reading about free will, I have to agree with those who insist it doesn’t exist. It’s an illusion, but probably necessary. Robert Sapolsky has written a book titled “Determined: A Science of Life Without Free Will” this excerpt describes an experience I’m having with increasing frequency.

“You may have had the uncanny experience of talking about an upcoming camping trip with a friend, only to find yourself served with ads for tents on social media later. Your phone didn’t record your conversation, even if that’s what it feels like. It’s just that the collective record of your likes, clicks, searches and shares paints such a detailed picture of your preferences and decision-making patterns that algorithms can predict — often with unsettling accuracy — what you are going to do.”

Sapolsky references a short story by Ted Chiang (What’s Expected of Us) in which the narrator describes a new technology that convinces users their choices are predetermined, a discovery that saps them of their will to live.

“It’s essential that you behave as if your decisions matter,” the narrator warns, “even though you know that they don’t.”

From a review in the Los Angeles Times. (Apple News) Below are some of my favorite bits.


“Most Americans have negative perceptions of atheists, and antiatheist prejudice is more prevalent than antipathy toward Muslims (which comes in second place), African Americans, LGBQT individuals, Jews, or Mormons.”

“We are nothing more or less than the cumulative biological and environmental luck, over which we had no control, that has brought us to this moment.”

“While change happens, we do not freely choose to change; instead, we are changed by the world around us.”

“Much has been made of the hospitality, conservatism (as in strictly conserving cultural norms), and violence of the traditional culture of honor of the American South. The pattern of violence tells a ton: murders in the South, which typically has the highest rates in the country, are not about stickups gone wrong in a city; they’re about murdering someone who has seriously tarnished your honor (by conspicuously bad-mouthing you, failing to repay a debt, coming on to your significant other…), particularly if living in a rural area.”

“You can’t successfully believe something different from what you believe.”

“Why did that moment just occur? “Because of what came before it.” They why did that moment just occur? “Because of what came before that,” forever, isn’t absurd and is, instead, how the universe works. […] In order to prove there’s free will, you have to show that some behavior just happened out of thin air in the sense of considering all these biological precursors. […] All that came before, with its varying flavors of uncontrollable luck, is what came to constitute you. This is how you became you.”

“By age three, your average high-socioeconomic status kid has heard about thirty million more words at home than a poor kid.”

“‘Free will’ is what we call the biology that we don’t understand on a predictive level yet, and when we do understand it, it stops being free will. […] We do something, carry out a behavior, and we feel like we’ve chosen, that there is a Me inside separate from all those neurons.”

“We are nothing more or less than the sum of that which we could not control — our biology, our environment, their interactions. […]Try as we might, we can’t will ourselves to have more willpower.”

“We don’t change our minds. Our minds, which are the end products of all the biological moments that came before, are *changed* by circumstances around us.”

“What the science in this book ultimately teaches is that there is no meaning. There’s no answer to “Why?” beyond “This happened because of what came just before, which happened because of what came just before that.” There is nothing but an empty, indifferent universe in which, occasionally, atoms come together temporarily to form things we each call Me.”

“Depression is the pathological loss of the capacity to rationalize away reality.”

The illusion of free will

“In a study published this week in the journal Scientific Reports, researchers in Australia were able to predict basic choices participants made 11 seconds before they consciously declared their decisions.”

“In the study, 14 participants—each placed in an fMRI machine—were shown two patterns, one of red horizontal stripes and one of green vertical stripes. They were given a maximum of 20 seconds to choose between them. Once they’d made a decision, they pressed a button and had 10 seconds to visualize the pattern as hard as they could. Finally, they were asked “what did you imagine?” and “how vivid was it?” They answered these questions by pressing buttons.”

“Using the fMRI to monitor brain activity and machine learning to analyze the neuroimages, the researchers were able to predict which pattern participants would choose up to 11 seconds before they consciously made the decision. And they were able to predict how vividly the participants would be able to envisage it.”

“Lead author Joel Pearson, cognitive neuroscience professor at the University of South Wales in Australia, said that the study suggests traces of thoughts exist unconsciously before they become conscious.”


  1. You are not driving the bus
  2. There is no “you”