3 ms·

You forgot the most important part, one's own model is not only probabilistic, it's also (more or less) forever challenged by reasoning to stabilize to some kin

You forgot the most important part, one's own model is not only probabilistic, it's also (more or less) forever challenged by reasoning to stabilize to some kind of self consistency. This refinement is critical and its mechanics still eludes everyone AFAIK.

AstralStorm 1y ago
Most people do not challenge theirs by reasoning, only by social approval - and that's easy to game. That's why they turn 180 or radicalize badly when exposed to sufficiently strong social or usual media.
- Mallowram 1y ago
  [dead]
  - sixo 1y ago
    You are spamming this and similar paragraphs all over this thread, and you come off as a crackpot.
    - mallowdram 1y ago
      It's science challenging CS. If there are no such things as symbols and metaphors in reality, and these are arbitrary, how possibly does it stay referential? It can't. It falls apart, language can't produce itself. It was denoted by Aristotle, the cognitive mapping people Okeefe, Moser, Kandel deciphered this in 1973 and now it feeds from mythological thought into AI "psychosis". Solve the problem at the source units, these descriptions like Alexander are arbitrary.
      - meowface 1y ago
        Your posts read like someone experiencing LLM psychosis.
        Viliam1234 1y ago
        Looking at their comment history, it's practically the only thing they ever write, over and over again.
        Mallowram 1y ago
        Just an experiment to see how lost the CS community is at the AI psychosis threshold. The industry has simply no clue to what it's automating in arbitrary words. Unless you all grasp the dimensions of the problem, the industry is a dinosaur. And this Alexander wand-waving ignores the basic scientific problem, waved away in cog-sci fantasies. The fact is language is a dinosaur. It's Pleistocene nonsense, and it should be a warning these Chat suicides and psychosis of what's yet to come if we continue using arbitrary language as a stand-in for human thought. It becomes more obvious with every stage of acceleration and now automation.

AstralStorm 1y ago

Most people do not challenge theirs by reasoning, only by social approval - and that's easy to game. That's why they turn 180 or radicalize badly when exposed to sufficiently strong social or usual media.

Mallowram 1y ago
[dead]
- sixo 1y ago
  You are spamming this and similar paragraphs all over this thread, and you come off as a crackpot.
  - mallowdram 1y ago
    It's science challenging CS. If there are no such things as symbols and metaphors in reality, and these are arbitrary, how possibly does it stay referential? It can't. It falls apart, language can't produce itself. It was denoted by Aristotle, the cognitive mapping people Okeefe, Moser, Kandel deciphered this in 1973 and now it feeds from mythological thought into AI "psychosis". Solve the problem at the source units, these descriptions like Alexander are arbitrary.
    - meowface 1y ago
      Your posts read like someone experiencing LLM psychosis.
      - Viliam1234 1y ago
        Looking at their comment history, it's practically the only thing they ever write, over and over again.
        Mallowram 1y ago
        Just an experiment to see how lost the CS community is at the AI psychosis threshold. The industry has simply no clue to what it's automating in arbitrary words. Unless you all grasp the dimensions of the problem, the industry is a dinosaur. And this Alexander wand-waving ignores the basic scientific problem, waved away in cog-sci fantasies. The fact is language is a dinosaur. It's Pleistocene nonsense, and it should be a warning these Chat suicides and psychosis of what's yet to come if we continue using arbitrary language as a stand-in for human thought. It becomes more obvious with every stage of acceleration and now automation.