N0b8ez

5 ms·

1.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
I love the idea of the comic villainy of someone who deliberately chooses to organize a team to find ways to circumvent Ozempic in order to keep their buyers unhealthy and addicted. Could such a schemer have an internal monologue, and what
2.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
They said other things besides just filtering, like writing responses.
3.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
But then why would you need to buy it?
4.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
Isn't that just like taking a phone call? I'm not sure what you're trying to imply.
5.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
The article mentions youtube as a source of training data, but seems to only be talking about audio transcriptions (text). But, isn't youtube more useful for multimodal training on the video data itself?
6.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
Centralizing and industrializing food production has its own famine hazards, like if a strong solar flare were to happen.
7.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
It's true that general-purpose robots have made little progress, compared to general-purpose AI, but the reasons for that might just be financial. AI has become a self-justifying busines model whereas generalist robots are still academ
8.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
>but there is little progress in robotics. Replacing "somewhere" work is many years away. I agree there's little progress in robotics, relative to AI. But "many years away" might mean just 10 years away. You can
9.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
> AI is not far superior at every job that exists today. I wasn't claiming that. I was responding to what you wrote: you quoted the part of my comment that said "[An AI that is able to replace humans at every currently existing
10.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
It is an assumption, but hypothetically, can you give examples of something that such an AI won't be able to do, assuming that it's already far superior to you at every job that exists today?
11.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
What types of jobs do you think humans will remain superior at forever? Or are you only commenting on the short-term improbability of humans becoming generally outcompeted?
12.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
Because there were other jobs, since there were still jobs that humans could do better or cheaper than machines could. An AI that is able to replace humans at every currently existing economic activity is probably going to be able to replac
13.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
I agree in the short-term the argument that AI puts people out of work isn't very strong and would also have told us to not invent word processors like you say. But some people envision a future where all jobs will be done by AI, witho
14.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
>but on real world maps, there are enclaves - little islands that belong to a country that they have not connection to. And if those shall have the same color as their parent country, then 4 colors is not enough... Can you give an exampl
15.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
I actually don't understand why it's significantly better for the landfill to be arranged in one way rather than another. Can you explain why it helps future generations?
16.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
How about a paper tape writer/puncher? Anyone made one of those?
17.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
Weren't there something like 5 glacial maxima in the past 200 thousand years? I had the impression they were more regularly occurring than "hundreds of thouands of years apart".
18.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
> The changing climate killed more, but the humans were the differentiating factor, so which one do you point the finger at? If we're the differentiating factor, I'd have to blame us. Am I right in understanding that these spec
19.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
It seems to cut both ways. If words are powerful, restricting words is also powerful. It's not clear why this leads to a pro-censorship stance, any more than to an anti-censorship one.
20.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
Well, if we're taking the stories at face value, Socrates knew what he was getting himself into when he chose to die, even when he could have easily escaped. He died to prove a point. If Nietzsche thinks this is silly, it's one of
21.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
> A huge amount of what I suffer with is not physical pain. It's not just physical suffering that she's supposedly immune to. She's also immune to all psychological suffering as well. And she is married, has kids, and is p
22.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
>AGI would have to suffer to become general enough to warrant the use of the word general. Jo Cameron doesn't have general intelligence? This seems absurd. Intelligence is orthogonal to phenomenology and affective states. People are
23.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
I tend to admire that Socrates used arguments in the process of that, unlike both of us right now.
24.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
> But more saliently, I think it's absurd to think our brains, or brains in general, do polynomial curve fitting in any meaningful sense. Why would an AI need to use the same mechanisms as a human to think? Most machines we create a
25.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
Is the Wittgensteinian problem that the AGI wouldn't understand concepts like we do, or is the problem that it wouldn't be able to use them better than a human?
26.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
Are you thinking of Searle's Chinese Room or another famous thought experiment? Is your issue that an AGI wouldn't really "understand" concepts, despite being better at using them than a human? >and as a trained philo
27.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
> silicon sentience Sentience is the ability to have experiences like pain and tasting sweetness. People usually use the word "sapient" or terms like AGI to describe an AI with advanced reasoning ability. This might sound like
28.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
That makes sense to me. However, I live in an area with very little crime, so I might be biased towards an approach that centers on the legitimacy of the rule of law, without me needing to worry much about law and order being the result of
29.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
I would have guessed the primary argument for armed police would be to scare criminals and dissuade them from violent crime. I'd guess some people would argue that having N fewer incidents of cops murdering suspects isn't worth ha
30.
by N0b8ez 2y ago
Things that are political or politics-adjacent often mean different things to different people (e.g. "defund the police"). Someone asking someone else for a definition of their own meaning helps prevent a shouting match.

More ›