> Why be obtuse?
In the context of the quote precision is called for. You cite fear but that's attempting to have it both ways.
> humanity as a whole doesn't have this "will" you speak of
Why not?
> will is an aspect of the consciousness of the individual.
I can't measure your will. I can measure the impact of your will through your actions in reality. See the problem? See why we can say "the will of humanity?"
> So you seem to be be uncritically anthropomorphizing social processes!
It's called "an aggregate."
> is a question that can only ever be speculated upon, but not definitively perceived.
The original point was that LLMs want the future to be like the past. You've way overshot the mark here.
> You've way overshot the mark here.
Nah, I'm just having fun.
>You cite fear but that's attempting to have it both ways.
Huh?
>In the context of the quote precision is called for.
Because we must make it explicit that AI is not conscious? But why?
Since you can only ever measure impacts on reality -- what difference does it make to you if there's a consciousness that's causing them or not?
>It's called "an aggregate."
An individual is conscious. Does it follow from this that the set of all individuals is itself conscious? I.e. do you say that it's appropriate to model humanity as sort of one giant human?