agamemnonymous

joined 2 years ago
[–] agamemnonymous 20 points 1 month ago

In what context is there a difference? "Orbit" and "revolve around" are synonyms.

[–] agamemnonymous 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I took Ethics to fulfill a social science requirement, but none of the schools I've gone to required it specifically.

[–] agamemnonymous -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

humans can learn a bunch of stuff without first learning the content of the whole internet and without the computing power of a datacenter or consuming the energy of Belgium. Humans learn to count at an early age too, for example.

I suspect that if you took into consideration the millions of generations of evolution that "trained" the basic architecture of our brains, that advantage would shrink considerably.

I would say that the burden of proof is therefore reversed. Unless you demonstrate that this technology doesn't have the natural and inherent limits that statistical text generators (or pixel) have, we can assume that our mind works differently.

I disagree. I'd argue evidence suggests we're just a more sophisticated version of a similar principle, refined over billions of years. We learn facts by rote, and learn similarities by rote until we develop enough statistical text (or audio) correlations to "understand" the world.

Conversations are a slightly meandering chain of statistically derived cliches. English adjective order is universally "understood" by native speakers based purely on what sounds right, without actually being able to explain why (unless you're a big grammar nerd). More complex conversations might seem novel, but they're just a regurgitation of rote memorized facts and phrases strung together in a way that seems appropriate to the conversation based on statistical experience with past conversations.

Also you say immature technology but this technology is not fundamentally (I.e. in terms of principle) different from what Weizenabum's ELIZA in the '60s. We might have refined model and thrown a ton of data and computing power at it, but we are still talking of programs that use similar principles.

As with the evolution of our brains, which have operated on basically the same principles for hundreds of millions of years. The special sauce between human intelligence and a flatworm's is a refined model.

So yeah, we don't understand human intelligence but we can appreciate certain features that absolutely lack on GPTs, like a concept of truth that for humans is natural.

I'm not sure you can claim that absolutely. That kind of feature is an internal experience, you can't really confirm or deny if a GPT has something similar. Besides, humans have a pretty tenuous relationship with the concept of truth. There are certainly humans that consider objective falsehoods to be Truth.

[–] agamemnonymous 0 points 1 month ago

Yeah, but Lucy has been letting us kick a pretty good portion of them. Dems are abysmal at marketing, but this administration has actually accomplished a decent amount of actual good policy. There are obvious exceptions and shortfalls, but it's not like every single football has been pulled away.

[–] agamemnonymous 8 points 1 month ago

Recognize the problems which you have the power to solve, and the ones you don't. Fix what you can with mindfulness and compassion, accept what you can't with emotionless calm. Reevaluate periodically.

[–] agamemnonymous 4 points 1 month ago

Heard that, this drawer is exclusively for things that were used exactly one year ago.

[–] agamemnonymous 2 points 1 month ago

Which side of the shit were you on?

[–] agamemnonymous 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I mean, epistemologically we can't know anything for sure. All we can do is try to come to reasonable conclusions with the information available to us.

The job of President is complicated. It is not remotely possible to go over every single detail of every single action. Every president makes whoopsies, I prefer to give benefit of the doubt between mistakes and malice. There are plenty of intentional things to criticize without sensationalizing this sort of thing

[–] agamemnonymous 12 points 1 month ago (9 children)

From what I read Biden didn't seek that judge to pardon, he was just one person affected by some big mass pardons. In this case I think he was one of like 1500 people who were moved to house arrest for non-violent crimes during Covid, who Biden pardoned all at once.

Still not great, the administration should've reviewed the details of those cases first, but it's not like he deliberately sought the guy out.

[–] agamemnonymous 6 points 1 month ago

This commercial features the main characters from the 2000s tv show Gilmore Girls

Ah, that makes more sense. She's "drinking him out of business" because she usually just leaves without paying.

[–] agamemnonymous 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Looks like a straight cigar cutter to me

view more: ‹ prev next ›