Chathamization

9 ms·

1.
by Chathamization 1y ago
Right, most people are would hate eating a 100% pure cacao bar, but that doesn't mean they won't enjoy chocolate. There's so much variability in these things, and in the end, it mostly comes down to "try different stuff
2.
by Chathamization 1y ago
> at least without assistive/adapted systems such as a wheelchair and accessible bus. Which is precisely what the robotic body I mentioned would be. You're talking about humans who have the mental capacity to do these things, b
3.
by Chathamization 1y ago
How are any of these a useful path to asking an AI to cook dinner? We already know many tasks that most humans can do relatively easily, yet most people don’t expect AI to be able to do them for years to come (for instance, L5 self-driving)
4.
by Chathamization 1y ago
That’s precisely what I meant in my comment by “these types of tests.” People are eventually going to have some sort of standard for what they consider AGI. But that doesn’t mean the current benchmarks are useful for this task at all, and s
5.
by Chathamization 1y ago
> Our belief is that once we can no longer come up with quantifiable problems that are "feasible for humans and hard for AI" then we effectively have AGI. I don’t think that follows. Just because people fail to create ARC-AGI p
6.
by Chathamization 2y ago
One of the things is wanting to be part of the discourse. For instance, this has happened to me several times - big players are talking about a particular topic. I dig through the primary sources, and see that many of the assumptions people
7.
by Chathamization 2y ago
> Of course, I’m self-aware enough to recognize that it might be because my writing is terrible or because I’m covering topics no one cares about. I've hard similar issues with you, and actually think the opposite to be the case. Wh
8.
by Chathamization 2y ago
No, I'm genuinely confused by your claim that in order for Chinese to be similar to English in this manner, it would be "somehow unique among all human languages." These are contradictory ideas. That's why I was asking f
9.
by Chathamization 2y ago
That's very much the impression I get. I've never seen pinyin used in Chinese writing, and the Chinese friends I've met have said they've never seen it either (they said they'd probably just look up the character or
10.
by Chathamization 2y ago
Removing the added information would make it much more difficult to parse, though. Paragraphs don't exist in oral English - or spaces between words, quotation marks, capitalization, etc. - but we still find it much more easy to read pr
11.
by Chathamization 2y ago
> So you were talking about both English and Chinese in that sentence. I was talking about English in the sentence you quoted. In the next paragraph, I said that Chinese was the same as English in this regard. That's why I couldn&#x
12.
by Chathamization 2y ago
Being able to write a character by hand, being able to type it up, and being able to read it are all different things. I doubt many Chinese would be thrown off from reading or typing 打喷嚏. I actually did a deep dive into the issue of unfamil
13.
by Chathamization 2y ago
> Unless Chinese is somehow unique among all human languages, this isn't true. I was talking about English in that paragraph: > The same is true for written English - putting spaces between words, dividing texts into paragraphs,
14.
by Chathamization 2y ago
From what I've heard people say (and what I've seen), the most common way to handle it is to simply write another character that sounds the same. In other words, the characters can be used as phonetic elements when it's neede
15.
by Chathamization 2y ago
The shrimp example is kind of strange. Like you said, it's an extremely common character, and not a difficult one either. But beyond that, if you look at it he got the radical, 虫, correct. The phonetic element, 下, is a fundamental char
16.
by Chathamization 2y ago
It would result in a pretty severe loss of fidelity. You may think it’s not needed, because that information isn’t available in spoken Chinese. The same is true for written English - putting spaces between words, dividing texts into paragra
17.
by Chathamization 2y ago
Even less of a difference. There's no equivalent character, so it's clearly 烹 written with an extra stroke. It's more like the difference between writing "deceive" and decieve."
18.
by Chathamization 2y ago
> I guess you could write down 景茶 (jing3cha2) and rely on the phonetics, or use a different word if you know one, but it's still wrong on a level that "choclit" just isn't. If a non-native did this in their own way w
19.
by Chathamization 2y ago
The fact that 嚔/sneeze is usually the go to example means it ends up becoming the exception that proves the rule. Most other characters are much more easily remembered.
20.
by Chathamization 2y ago
True. You also need a group that knows what they're doing and is trying to be cutthroat. Then the whole table is trying to trade for color sets and dissuade others from trading for color sets, which often leads to this absurd mass nego
21.
by Chathamization 2y ago
Right, but I don't see anything in the quoted text implying that's not the case: > In Sirens of Titan, there’s this army of Mars which is really a joke. No one in the army, [not] even the officers, are really in charge of what’
22.
by Chathamization 2y ago
Which part of that quote do you think is a misreading? That's exactly how I remember it unfolding in the book.
23.
by Chathamization 2y ago
It depends on the people you’re playing with. With an active group there’s a lot of strategy that goes into the negotiations, and also a good amount of “push your luck” gameplay. In my experience, a lot of the game comes down to one or two
24.
by Chathamization 2y ago
> I still remember the screen names of folks I interacted with in and on IRC, AIM, ezboard, IGN boards, forums, etc. > I only remember a handful of HN usernames and absolutely zero handles from elsewhere. Same. It's strange that
25.
by Chathamization 2y ago
> Is that no longer the web? From what I've seen, a lot - I'd say most - of the communities that existed outside of the major platforms have dried up or ended (the famous/infamous bodybuilding forum apparently just went do
26.
by Chathamization 2y ago
> Regardless, I just read the transcript for that video and he doesn’t give any timeline so it seems premature to crow that he was wrong. If you watch the video he's clearly saying this was was something that was already happening.
27.
by Chathamization 2y ago
The AI doomsday folk had an even worse track record over the past decade. There was supposed to be mass unemployment of truck drivers years ago. According to CCP Grey's Human's Need Not Apply[1] from 10 years ago, the robot Baxter
28.
by Chathamization 2y ago
Discussing these textbooks - and more generally discussing education - also seems to reveal a lot of weaknesses in how people think about the world. There's a tendency to think that because something is difficult it's worthwhile.
29.
by Chathamization 2y ago
> Their use is similar to radicals in Mandarin, which is to provide additional semantic clarification. Radicals are used in the same way for Hanzi (Chinese/"Mandarin") and Kanji (Japanese). Most of the Japanese characters
30.
by Chathamization 3y ago
> I mean, isn't that what Bell Labs basically was? Put smart people in a supportive playground and harvest the cream off the top? Was it? A lot of people here think the transistor was one of the most important inventions to come out

More ›