5 ms·

I would suggest the author actually talk to some real people. Not on Twitter, or Mastodon, or anything - just real people. Hell, you can even get away with joi

I would suggest the author actually talk to some real people. Not on Twitter, or Mastodon, or anything - just real people. Hell, you can even get away with joining a small discord server and joining a voice chat there. Anything but the large, hype- and drama-driven user generated content ad farms.

jasode 4y ago
>I would suggest the author actually talk to some real people. Not on Twitter, or Mastodon, or anything - just real people. Friendly fyi in case you got the impression he was a recluse isolated in a basement ... The author "talks to real people" all the time. Examples: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Venkatesh+Rao https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Venkatesh+Rao
- lionkor 4y ago
  I didnt make assumptions about the kind of lifestyle the author leads, at least not purposefully. I just cannot imagine thinking like this if youre not completely detached from real, normal human interactions.
  - jasode 4y ago
    >I just cannot imagine thinking like this if youre not completely detached from real, normal human interactions. Your statement makes it seems like you've misunderstood his thesis. He's envisioning a future where humans-to-humans conversation is more intimate, more meaningful because it's not limited to textual language. Example excerpt from his article: >"We’ll all be like children inventing secret languages for talking to imaginary friends, except they will be real friends." His attachment to real human interactions is letting him see a future where real interactions can be "post-language". The post-language "secret language" could be images, or dynamic translations customized for the particular person's brain.
    - eternalban 4y ago
      > more meaningful How could it possibly be more meaningful. Languages mature over time, bits of other langauges are integrated, vocabularies expand, new forms of expression in the langauge appears, by serious practioners of writing or speaking in the language. > We’ll all be like children Oh great. Goo goo ga ga level civilization then. Curious as to how "children" discover the mutual new language and start communicating in it. > His attachment to real human interactions is letting him see a future where real interactions can be "post-language". The post-language "secret language" could be images, or dynamic translations customized for the particular person's brain. Sorry, but this is actually a silly notion of the OP. It shows an utter lack of understanding of the role of language in human society. Language is a repository of cultural memory broken down to composable bits.
      - kajaktum 4y ago
        > Goo goo ga ga level civilization You’re not being open minded here. Our traditional languages are so inefficient at actually conveying information. Whenever we try to explain very complicated concepts, we always dumb it down to very basic illustrations like philosopher’s diners or ice cream stands explain complex actor model. This is necessary for intuition because using parsing “adult” language at this level is extremely hard. I think what OP meant is that we will have more of this. LLMs have opened up more possibilities in how we convey information to one another. Why _should_ we stick to English? Why can’t we all converse in generated images, real-time generated videos and illustrations? For example, instead of having PDFs, slides, Jupyter notebooks or whatever for class material. We will instead of 1000 long line of unreadable and undecipherable prompt to an LLM that will generate that course content that you can talk and interact with?
        eternalban 4y ago
        Conjuring a group of philosophers together with the intermittent (fork - plate) cycle is a subtle structural setup. There is thought behind that gestalt of simple elements that started off in a thicket of complexity. That thought is also the product of collaboration over time by experts. Finally, at the end of that discourse, someone reduced it to its essential complexity and showed applicability to general patterns of interaction. None of that is child talk. OP started off on a promising note and one hoped that he would start playing the song of 'vector languages' for machine intelligence -- but alas, he then started singing out of tune. > You’re not being open minded here. Unfair. Rather may I suggest you did not read carefully. I did say "civilization". In a civilization, you will need both teachers and students; thinkers, and readers. What language will the thinkers use? "Explaining" is a concern regarding established results. What about deriving new results? (See above)

jasode 4y ago

>I would suggest the author actually talk to some real people. Not on Twitter, or Mastodon, or anything - just real people. Friendly fyi in case you got the impression he was a recluse isolated in a basement ... The author "talks to real people" all the time. Examples: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Venkatesh+Rao https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Venkatesh+Rao

lionkor 4y ago
I didnt make assumptions about the kind of lifestyle the author leads, at least not purposefully. I just cannot imagine thinking like this if youre not completely detached from real, normal human interactions.
- jasode 4y ago
  >I just cannot imagine thinking like this if youre not completely detached from real, normal human interactions. Your statement makes it seems like you've misunderstood his thesis. He's envisioning a future where humans-to-humans conversation is more intimate, more meaningful because it's not limited to textual language. Example excerpt from his article: >"We’ll all be like children inventing secret languages for talking to imaginary friends, except they will be real friends." His attachment to real human interactions is letting him see a future where real interactions can be "post-language". The post-language "secret language" could be images, or dynamic translations customized for the particular person's brain.
  - eternalban 4y ago
    > more meaningful How could it possibly be more meaningful. Languages mature over time, bits of other langauges are integrated, vocabularies expand, new forms of expression in the langauge appears, by serious practioners of writing or speaking in the language. > We’ll all be like children Oh great. Goo goo ga ga level civilization then. Curious as to how "children" discover the mutual new language and start communicating in it. > His attachment to real human interactions is letting him see a future where real interactions can be "post-language". The post-language "secret language" could be images, or dynamic translations customized for the particular person's brain. Sorry, but this is actually a silly notion of the OP. It shows an utter lack of understanding of the role of language in human society. Language is a repository of cultural memory broken down to composable bits.
    - kajaktum 4y ago
      > Goo goo ga ga level civilization You’re not being open minded here. Our traditional languages are so inefficient at actually conveying information. Whenever we try to explain very complicated concepts, we always dumb it down to very basic illustrations like philosopher’s diners or ice cream stands explain complex actor model. This is necessary for intuition because using parsing “adult” language at this level is extremely hard. I think what OP meant is that we will have more of this. LLMs have opened up more possibilities in how we convey information to one another. Why _should_ we stick to English? Why can’t we all converse in generated images, real-time generated videos and illustrations? For example, instead of having PDFs, slides, Jupyter notebooks or whatever for class material. We will instead of 1000 long line of unreadable and undecipherable prompt to an LLM that will generate that course content that you can talk and interact with?
      - eternalban 4y ago
        Conjuring a group of philosophers together with the intermittent (fork - plate) cycle is a subtle structural setup. There is thought behind that gestalt of simple elements that started off in a thicket of complexity. That thought is also the product of collaboration over time by experts. Finally, at the end of that discourse, someone reduced it to its essential complexity and showed applicability to general patterns of interaction. None of that is child talk. OP started off on a promising note and one hoped that he would start playing the song of 'vector languages' for machine intelligence -- but alas, he then started singing out of tune. > You’re not being open minded here. Unfair. Rather may I suggest you did not read carefully. I did say "civilization". In a civilization, you will need both teachers and students; thinkers, and readers. What language will the thinkers use? "Explaining" is a concern regarding established results. What about deriving new results? (See above)