6 ms·

Is this a clever rhetorical trick to make it appear that your prior claim was correct? If not: what am I intended to take away from this? What is its relevance

Is this a clever rhetorical trick to make it appear that your prior claim was correct? If not: what am I intended to take away from this? What is its relevance to my comment?

bloomingkales 2y ago
You made a joke about questioning reality, I simply entertained it. You can do whatever you want with it, wasn’t a slight at all.
- mistermann 2y ago
  It may have been in the form of a joke, but I certainly wasn't joking. I think it is interesting what actions cannot be done by humans.
  - bloomingkales 2y ago
    I wasn’t joking either. Things are just getting started with this AI stuff, and I feel like programmers will experience that “de ja vu” phenomenon that they talk about in the Matrix, that eerie feeling something isn’t right. Look, why have game developers spent so much time lazy loading parts of the game world? Very rarely do they just load the whole world, even in 2025. See, the worlds get bigger, so even as the tech gets better, we will always lazy load worlds in. It’s a context issue right? Developers have just recently been given this thing called “context”. But yeah man, why do we think just because we walked from our house to the supermarket that this reality didn’t lazy load things. That’s how programmers have been doing it all along … Anyways
    - mistermann 2y ago
      A more parsimonious explanation: consciousness is generative, like an LLM. And, according to cultural conditioning, this generated scenario is referred to as reality. I like this version for at least two reasons: 1. It is 100% compliant with large quantities of scientific findings (psychology and neuroscience), whreas I believe yours has a conservation of mass problem at least 2. Everyone dislikes it at least in certain scenarios (say, when reference is made to it during an object level disagreement)

6 ms·

Is this a clever rhetorical trick to make it appear that your prior claim was correct? If not: what am I intended to take away from this? What is its relevance

by mistermann 2y ago

Is this a clever rhetorical trick to make it appear that your prior claim was correct? If not: what am I intended to take away from this? What is its relevance to my comment?

bloomingkales 2y ago
You made a joke about questioning reality, I simply entertained it. You can do whatever you want with it, wasn’t a slight at all.
- mistermann 2y ago
  It may have been in the form of a joke, but I certainly wasn't joking. I think it is interesting what actions cannot be done by humans.
  - bloomingkales 2y ago
    I wasn’t joking either. Things are just getting started with this AI stuff, and I feel like programmers will experience that “de ja vu” phenomenon that they talk about in the Matrix, that eerie feeling something isn’t right. Look, why have game developers spent so much time lazy loading parts of the game world? Very rarely do they just load the whole world, even in 2025. See, the worlds get bigger, so even as the tech gets better, we will always lazy load worlds in. It’s a context issue right? Developers have just recently been given this thing called “context”. But yeah man, why do we think just because we walked from our house to the supermarket that this reality didn’t lazy load things. That’s how programmers have been doing it all along … Anyways
    - mistermann 2y ago
      A more parsimonious explanation: consciousness is generative, like an LLM. And, according to cultural conditioning, this generated scenario is referred to as reality. I like this version for at least two reasons: 1. It is 100% compliant with large quantities of scientific findings (psychology and neuroscience), whreas I believe yours has a conservation of mass problem at least 2. Everyone dislikes it at least in certain scenarios (say, when reference is made to it during an object level disagreement)