4 ms·

You can't use chairs to get to the moon not because of distance but because of orbital mechanics. That's why chairs work and colors don't: you think you're gett

You can't use chairs to get to the moon not because of distance but because of orbital mechanics. That's why chairs work and colors don't: you think you're getting closer by stacking chairs when in reality, all you're going to do is fall down. Until you grasp orbital mechanics, the concept of orbital velocity, and delta-V you can't possibly get to the moon. The distance might as well be infinite because the gravity well will pull you down. It's also a completely invisible problem until you really reach altitude unless you're got a lot of theoretical background which we don't have on artificial intelligence. We don't even really know what the AI rockets will look like when compared with AI chairs.

glenstein 4y ago
>That's why chairs work and colors don't: you think you're getting closer by stacking chairs when in reality, all you're going to do is fall down. People seem to keep missing this point, but no, in my hypothetical the chairs really do work because, in the end of the effectively increase the mass of the entire Earth, and in so far as the increasingly silly analogy sheds light on anything it's that the quantitative advancement does convey a qualitative benefit. Which, as it happens, is a perfect encapsulation of the way in which chat GPT has achieved its success thus far. It's also helpful because exposes the pitfall of the analogy in an important way, which is that the analogy purports to assert a category difference, but fails to do so. In your version, the new category is orbital mechanics, and I can just see the satisfaction radiating off your comment as you repeatedly imply a deficit of knowledge on the part of anyone who might disagree. But my analogy got from point a to point b while disregarding this entirely, because orbital mechanics is a means to the end of traversing distance, and not the only means, and not something that identifies a distinct fundamental category into which one must enter to traverse the distance. It's this confusion over methods and fundamental principles that is the entire point I was making in my original comment.

glenstein 4y ago

>That's why chairs work and colors don't: you think you're getting closer by stacking chairs when in reality, all you're going to do is fall down. People seem to keep missing this point, but no, in my hypothetical the chairs really do work because, in the end of the effectively increase the mass of the entire Earth, and in so far as the increasingly silly analogy sheds light on anything it's that the quantitative advancement does convey a qualitative benefit. Which, as it happens, is a perfect encapsulation of the way in which chat GPT has achieved its success thus far. It's also helpful because exposes the pitfall of the analogy in an important way, which is that the analogy purports to assert a category difference, but fails to do so. In your version, the new category is orbital mechanics, and I can just see the satisfaction radiating off your comment as you repeatedly imply a deficit of knowledge on the part of anyone who might disagree. But my analogy got from point a to point b while disregarding this entirely, because orbital mechanics is a means to the end of traversing distance, and not the only means, and not something that identifies a distinct fundamental category into which one must enter to traverse the distance. It's this confusion over methods and fundamental principles that is the entire point I was making in my original comment.