[ExI] Why do the language model and the vision model align?

[John Clark]

On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 1:56 PM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

* > I do think that the example of a human brain is relevant, though, in
> that a brain does only receive abstract signals and has to correlate them
> together.*


*Human brains can obtain the ability to perform intelligent acts by
correlating signals that come from the real physical world and without
using text at all, in fact for most of the existence of human brains
written text did not even exist; but we now know that an AI can become
intelligent by written text alone. And that's why I was surprised. *

*>  The big difference is that human babies get data through a number of
> different channels, clearly differentiated (at first), representing the
> different sensory modalities, then this information, together with feedback
> from things like picking up objects and cramming them into your mouth,
> etc., gets associated together in many different ways. A chatbot just gets
> text. A future multi-modal AI would be much closer to a human baby though,
> and I wouldn't be surprised if it could easily learn physics etc., just as
> a human can. An embodied AI even more so.*


*I think that's true. A chatbot needs a much larger dataset to learn
something than a human baby does, and in the above you explain why. *


> * > A multi-modal AI linked to a number of robotic bodies equipped with
> different sensory and motor capabilities (and a few other things like
> long-term and working memories and the ability to model other agents, etc.)
> would not need a 'mechanical turk' system, I suspect it would very soon
> reach human-equivalence in many areas.*


*I agree.*

*John K Clark *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260217/9442e244/attachment.htm>