randomImmigrant

6 ms·

1.
by randomImmigrant 4d ago
Can someone with direct AI experience respond: Does RSI necessarily need to be pointed towards “AGI”, whatever that is? Or can you have a recursive self improvement loop where the objective is to create models that are more legible to human
2.
by randomImmigrant 7d ago
Should Hacker News be renamed Hacker America?
3.
by randomImmigrant 8d ago
In short, after after training AI on an extraordinarily amount of human cognitive output, we are now facing the possibility that our ability to train by working on hard problems will be slowly stripped away at least in some domains. It’s li
4.
by randomImmigrant 9d ago
You know, I pooh poohed his theories. Still do in sum. But there’s a there there that’s building. Damn Deepak Chopra and his ilk of idiots for making any conversation of quantum mechanics and biology tinged with pseudoscience. Hopefully we’
5.
by randomImmigrant 11d ago
Ok great, thanks. Now you’ve brought up facial recognition, and that’s actually a great example to show where the analogy breaks, and the idea of a few sparse cells encoding specific faces has been conclusively disproved: https:/&#x2F
6.
Genome Duplication Is an Evolutionary Gamble(quantamagazine.org)
3 points by randomImmigrant 13d ago|0 comments
7.
by randomImmigrant 13d ago
> Calling a horse's reins as analogous to a cars steering wheel doesn't mean that the person making the analogy can't tell a horse from a car When a person says “I crashed the car because my steering wheel tore, like reign
8.
by randomImmigrant 13d ago
Sliding past the mistakes pointed out, shifting goalposts and trying to recover I see. Let’s say I’m a complete moron and don’t know what a sparse embedding is. Pretty please, can you define it for me and then tell me, in detail, where in w
9.
by randomImmigrant 14d ago
I’m not sure what you think I’m arguing against but saying that it matches with one of the cognitive models du jour is… odd. The problem with the hopfield model is it simplifies the brain too much. The base unit is “the neuron”. Ok… but wha
10.
by randomImmigrant 14d ago
> If someone's hippocampus is destroyed, they lose the ability to form new (episodic) memories, and may lose some more recent old ones, but they certainly do not lose older ones. This is basic knowledge. Yes, like basic reading with
11.
by randomImmigrant 14d ago
Yes I’ve come across reservoir computing. As a neuroscientist, it made me sit up and take notice. I’d say that I feel there’s homology in language. What reservoir computing says about the efficiency benefits of having a fixed but tunable dy
12.
by randomImmigrant 14d ago
Ooh thanks for the hijack! It’s so much easier to talk to someone who isn’t stuck in a picture of the brain from the 1980s. Yes, I fall more towards the camp that a lot of our cognitive models, built from times when we didn’t have the resol
13.
by randomImmigrant 14d ago
> None of that changes whether there is a physical capacity, which I think was the larger point? Capacity in what sense? Are we saying it’s X MB of data the brain can store? That claim is steeped in assumptions. On the other hand, no one
14.
by randomImmigrant 14d ago
> Obviously not, which is why I didn't say it did! But you sneak it into your assumptions on what a memory must be. > However, if you want to identify where long-term memories are stored And why do you assume there is a specific
15.
by randomImmigrant 14d ago
How much of this, I wonder, is a function of the fact that our circadian rhythms get less robust with aging. The circadian clock hugely influences learning and memory processes, gating when you can learn and how much, and shaping the storag
16.
by randomImmigrant 14d ago
The brain does not have the Von Neumann bottleneck. Unlike most current digital systems, the brain doesn’t have a separate memory registry it needs to pull from. Engrams, that is, the physical trace of a memory, are not stable through life.
17.
by randomImmigrant 15d ago
I’m with Zitron on the frustration and even the analysis of the economic feasibility of AI. What I’ve stopped doing is reading him regularly. It feels hard to parse the factual from the obviously exaggerated. I get he’s frustrated. We all a
18.
by randomImmigrant 17d ago
There’s a lot that’s good here, but you just can’t be slime molds in a modern capitalist corporation. A substantial portion of company goals is set by a very small group that is far removed from the day to day work, and the goals are ofte
19.
Cackle Pop Roar Reptiles have a lot to say(knowablemagazine.org)
3 points by randomImmigrant 20d ago|0 comments
20.
by randomImmigrant 20d ago
This is so so wrong I don’t even know where to begin. There may be no objective definition or measure of consciousness. But it is not a property arising from mutual care. That argument is like one of the many “just so” evolutionary psycholo
21.
by randomImmigrant 20d ago
Here’s how I’m thinking about it (still digging into the details): across genomics, it’s become clear few traits have clear traceability to a few loci in the genome. Instead, evidence has been growing that epistasis, the nonlinear interacti
22.
by randomImmigrant 20d ago
Oh proper images. And if I focus I can increase resolution. I can get to where it’s as good as real life, for most things. But if it’s a book character I’ve never seen, the details are more oddly distributed and not stable over time, except
23.
by randomImmigrant 20d ago
For me the image in front of my eyes is not gone. I’m just not going to remember any details about it because my focus is inwards, on what my minds eye is showing me.
24.
by randomImmigrant 21d ago
Ahh… that hypothetical is physically impossible for biology. It just cannot be done. So I’m not sure how useful a perfect clone of an organism with identical experience and memory is as a hypothetical object. As strictly impossible, I don’t
25.
by randomImmigrant 21d ago
I have no problem with the concept of an artificial system going rogue. But that assumes it can choose. And I don’t see much evidence for choice. Comparing to the human case is problematic precisely because while conceivable it’s not a part
26.
by randomImmigrant 21d ago
> This is a strange conclusion Not really, with the population behavior being this way, though I clearly was mistaken in saying the behavior didn’t have exceptions. > Moreover, Each starling in a flock of starlings is a separate evolu
27.
by randomImmigrant 21d ago
Agree completely on liability.
28.
by randomImmigrant 21d ago
Thanks for pointing out the exceptions. Gonna dig into those.
29.
by randomImmigrant 21d ago
The lockstep coordination with no defection is interesting to me. No group of pre-AI agents would do this to this extent, nor would you see this continue over time as those agents interacted. A flock of starlings cooperate, but they don’t c
30.
by randomImmigrant 21d ago
I wouldn’t hire them again, and if they did behave like an amoral hacker collective that will do anything for me, pre AI I’d have reported them. Today I’d say they failed to convince me they’re human and thus failed the Turing test when the

More ›