adamzwasserman

13 ms·

181.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
You're right - I mixed up cerebellum/cerebrum/cortex terminology. My bad. The cases I'm referencing are hydrocephalus patients with severely compressed cerebral tissue who maintained normal cognitive function. The point
182.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
You're actually proving Wittgenstein's point. We share the same physical world, but we don't encounter the same problems. A lion's concerns - territory, hunting, pride hierarchy - are fundamentally different from ours: m
183.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
https://npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/03/16/392789753/a... https://irishtimes.com/news/remarkable-story-of-maths-genius... https://biology.stackexchange.co
184.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
If you can define consciousness in a way that is independently verifiable, you should definitely do so. World-wide fame and riches await you.
185.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
I understand the temptation to compare LLMs and computer vision, but I think it’s misleading to equate generative AI with feature-identification or descriptive AI systems like those in early computer vision. LLMs, which focus on generating
186.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
https://npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/03/16/392789753/a... https://irishtimes.com/news/remarkable-story-of-maths-genius... https://biology.stackexchange.co
187.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
Interesting timing - I'm building genx.software which leans hard into implicit inheritance for the exact reason he is abandoning it. In my finance app, when the product owner changes their mind about decimal places for the 47th time (a
188.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
It's a dog eat dog world for sure. It does in fact seem that a part of intelligence is using it to compete ruthlessly with other intelligences.
189.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
Exactly. Notable by its absence.
190.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
LLMs do not understand anything. They have a very complex multidimensional "probability table" (more correctly a compressed geometric representation of token relationships) that they use to string together tokens (which have no
191.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
My mistake thx. I meant "despite having no, or close to no, brain beyond a cerebellum"
192.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
You could have stopped here: "There is NO WAY you can define "consciousness"
193.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
the article misses the significance of it.
194.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
From a terminology point of view, I absolutely agree. Human-likeness is what most people mean when they talk about AGI. Calling it what it is would clarify a lot of the discussions around it. However I am clear that I do not believe that
195.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
The article misses three critical points: 1. Conflates consciousness with "thinking" - LLMs may process information effectively without being conscious, but the article treats these as the same phenomenon 2. Ignores the cerebellum
196.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
I wish them the best of luck.
197.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
I perform a different analysis, focused more on the type of blue collar jobs that most people believe are the prime candidates for AI/robotic job replacement: https://emusings.substack.com/p/is-automation-going-to-
198.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
Yawn. He still obviously believes in some sort of underlying "reality" in spite of his claims to the contrary. The wavefunction evolves as if it were a single, global, observer-independent object.Between interactions, nothing “hap
199.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
grammerly is a particularly intrusive TSR (showing my age here). So much so, that even though I like it, I will not run it. Superhuman's entire value proposition was "staying out of my way". All I can do is hope that the latt
200.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
Off topic: a guaranteed way to start a flame war in an automotive forum is to state that there is no such thing as "backpressure" and that fluid dynamics and the continuity equation fully explain why restricting exhaust pipe diame
201.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
If only we could convert it into auto generated comments... But then, maybe not!
202.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
I wish them luck. Any consensus at all, on any definition at all, would be a boon to mankind. Unfortunately I am certain that all we have to look forward to is endless goal post shifting.
203.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
I agree. I sometimes do that. But very rarely.
204.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
I will complain about the global object. Even though technically, everything in Python is an object, I feel strongly that programmers should avoid OOP in Python like the plague. Every object is a petri dish for state corruption. Thee is a v
205.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
Another way of saying this is: If your development team consists of autistic junior programmers with eidetic memory, then you damn well better make sure that your documentation is exceedingly thorough, absolutely unambiguous, and as restric
206.
by adamzwasserman 1y ago
A hacker classic: https://www.hactrn.net/sra/vaxen.html
207.
by adamzwasserman 3y ago
This is not on Cloudflare in particular. This is not even on the two clueless hatchet people sent to do the dirty work. This is an indictment of the HR profession, its credentialing entities, and various state and federal labour laws which
208.
by adamzwasserman 5y ago
The earliest call for something like this that I am aware of is Douglas McIlroy’s 1968 paper calling for “Mass Produced Software Components” which he delivered at the NATO Science Committee, Garmisch, Germany. It is not exactly what Block P
209.
by adamzwasserman 5y ago
So you are not really arguing that human knowledge cannot be categorized. In fact you are sort of arguing the opposite: Human knowledge lends itself so well to categorization that a single ontology is impossible (if it was really hard to ca