LocalLLaMA

exactly what it is (i.e. a computer program)

I get what you mean, but I believe it's more productive not lumping a neural network (inference model), with much of the "logic" coming from automated/self-training, into being "just a computer program". There's historical context & understanding of a "program" where a human actually designs & knows what IF-THEN-ELSE type of logic is executed... understanding it will do what it is 'programmed' to do. NN inference is modeled after (& named after) the human brain (weighted neurons) and there is both a lack of understanding all (most!) of the logic ('program') that is executing under-the-hood, as they say.

Note: I'm not at all saying that GPT 3.5/4 are sentient, but rather that it's missing a lot of the nuance, as well as complexity, of LLMs by referring to them as simply being "just a computer program".

it's dismissive & rude for you to call it "fooled" that he came to a different conclusion than you about a subtle philosophical question

If you ever wonder if the machine is sentient, ask it to write code for something somewhat obscure.

I'm trying to run a Docker container in NixOS. NixOS is a Linux distro known for being super resilient (I break stuff a lot because I don't know what in doing), and while it's not some no-name distro, it's also not that popular. GPT 4 Turbo has given me wrong answer after wrong answer and it's infuriating. Bard too.

If this thing was sentient, it'd be a lot better at this stuff. Or at least be able to say, "I don't know, but I can help you figure it out".