7 ms·
> They are necessarily behind the status quo. That seems like a really bizarre way to describe a tool that solved an open Millennium Prize Problem. They are, e
by handoflixue 13d ago
> They are necessarily behind the status quo.
That seems like a really bizarre way to describe a tool that solved an open Millennium Prize Problem. They are, empirically and repeatedly, ahead of the status quo.
So if your argument depends on them being behind the status quo, reality has already disproven it multiple times over.
- mitxela 13d agoI wasn't aware a dictionary definition solved a Millennium Prize problem. Which one and how?
- ben_w 12d agoI believe the argument you're responding to is "a set of dictionary definitions does not suffice to define intelligence"? I will admit the first time I read the thing you're replying to, I had a similar thought as you; From the sibling reply from them, I think they think they were obvious, but that also means I wouldn't expect their reply to help unless you had the same flash of inspiration I had.