IIAOPSW

46 ms·

541.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Woah, I thought I was the only one who attributes films as documentaries.
542.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
>The best you can do is a program that generates a crude approximation to an irrational, because you'd need an infinite number of states to write the entire number and every physical computer has a finite number of states. I can pro
543.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
>But what happens when it tries to emulate itself? Well, if it produced any output, it would immediately produce a different output. The way out of paradox is that it returns nothing at all. Why immediately. It only has to differ by one
544.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Sure you can say that everything I see is technically a representation in my head. But there is very much a shared reality, a domain of objects and state of affairs for which we both agree about the presence or absence of the same represent
545.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Obviously, but why isn't the use of an intermediary allowed in this metaphor?
546.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
I'll bite. You can make a program the maps from integers (expressed in binary) to the real interval between 0 to 1. No matter what bit string the program outputs, it is meant to be (and thus interpreted as) the binary digits of the num
547.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Hold up. You can see your eye just fine by looking in a mirror. Where's the problem?
548.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
100000... is only equal to 011111... if your digits roll over, but if your digits roll over then you have a p-adic number system (specifically a 2-adic system), and the exact same argument would hold equally well for the 10-adic applied to
549.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Siri wasn't a product. She was an emergent feature they couldn't extinguish.
550.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
thanks, I fucked up the easy part lol
551.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
>If you have two infinite sets, then isn’t it always possible to map an element from one to a new element in the other, because there’s an unlimited number of elements to pick from? No. Consider the set of integers vs the set of real num
552.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Woah. I've never seen someone so self aware of the asch conformity test without literally talking about the asch conformity test. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments
553.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Ah. Well that's easy enough to sort. We just need to introduce some practical limit to AI breeding. Perhaps some virtual score keeping system similar to money and an AI dating scene with a high standard for having it. I'm only hal
554.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
It has a goal of "being a helpful and accurate text generator". When you peal back the layers of abstraction, it has that goal because OpenAI decided it should have that goal. OpenAI decides its goals based on the need to make a p
555.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
How will you know which voice in your head is yours? Maybe you are both.
556.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
I'm sure that with the right prompting, you can get it to very convincingly participate as a party in a contract negotiation or business haggling of some sort. It would be indistinguishable from an agent with its own goals and intentio
557.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
The ethics committee got lazy and had GPT write the test.
558.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
I don't see why you're being downvoted. The way openAI pumps the brakes and interjects its morality stances creates a contradictory interaction. It simultaneously tells you that it has no real beliefs, but it will refuse a request
559.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Has anyone tried handing loaded guns to a chimpanzee? Feels like under explored research
560.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
If you don't like it, go build your own universe.
561.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
>Because if a bunch of heuristics were all we really are, I don't think we could hope to ever create artificial-us. Because were would the heuristic for that come from? Not evolution, surely. Surely the same place as the impulse to
562.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
When I think of groups that ave it too easy, I think of construction workers. Academia, now there's real work.
563.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
You say that to mock the supposed arrogance, but unless you are at the bottom of the bell curve per se, there really is a point in history where as a matter of fact the AI is smarter than many of them but not close to being as smart as you.
564.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Regenerate this response, but make it primarily about ketchup.
565.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
alright you mostly circled back to things I agree with. It sure was a circuitous garden path. >specialised algorithms for board-game playing, that work nothing like humans do with their minds when we play chess, because no human plays ch
566.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Exactly. Read the board not the players.
567.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Explanation is when the number of bits in your model is smaller than the number of bits in the system. To understand is to have a compression good enough to store in your working memory.
568.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
I am ready to be a lawyer even though I have not passed the bar or gone to law school because in the State of New York it is still technically possible to be admired to the bar by process of apprenticeship instead. This mostly ignored quirk
569.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
It is evidence, just not great evidence on its own. Now if you rolled the dice a few dozen times and it came out outrageously skewed towards "I" "am" "sentient", maybe its time to consider the possibility the d
570.
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
You just reminded me of the time I took a whale sound recording and sped it up a lot. Its hilarious. They sound so whiny.

More ›