3 ms·
I hate how much I’m reflexively trying to find a "but" here, because "carbon nanrcissist" is a hell of an insult. It’s hard to swallow that we’re just first gen
by JhonOliver 7mo ago
I hate how much I’m reflexively trying to find a "but" here, because "carbon nanrcissist" is a hell of an insult. It’s hard to swallow that we’re just first gen firmware being ported to better hardware, and my gut still wants to scream that there's a qualitative difference between a synaptic firing and a logic gate. But honestly, if I saw a person and an LLM output the exact same breakthrough, I’d call the human a visionary and the machine a statistical fluke, and I can't actually point to a mathematical reason why other than the fact that I’m made of meat and I want to feel special. We’re basically just the computers of 1935. But I disagree that my soul might is just high dimensional data compression that haven't been optimized yet
- verdverm 7mo agoThis relies on the assumption that humans have souls, which is unprovable in either direction. The best way to understand this is through the lens of religion and faith. I heed the Buddha's wisdom, attachment leads to suffering, and avoid personification of my tools.
- JhonOliver 7mo agoI agree that we need religion. But it requires a religion that says life can only exist in carbon and not silicon. Does Buddism have this?
- verdverm 7mo agoI did not say we need religion. I said that thinking there is a soul is a religious thing. I personally don't think man or machine has a soul, if you do, its purely on faith alone, like a religion. Religion is the number one cause of discrimination and war, you can learn good values without it.