cauch

19 ms·

121.
by cauch 4mo ago
Maybe a good analogy is "throwing a paper plane in real life" and "throwing a paper plane in a video game". In real life, the paper moves "by itself". It does not need an external loop that update its position
122.
by cauch 4mo ago
What you are referring to is Searle assertion that "because the Chinese room concept, I conclude that every future human-made systems will be a Chinese room and will never be 'intelligent'". I think it is an important nu
123.
by cauch 4mo ago
Fair enough, but then, a pocket calculator also understands math, and a pocket translator also understands language. And a wikipedia page that inform you about radioactivity understands nuclear physics. Some will maybe say it is the case, b
124.
by cauch 4mo ago
There is no "loop" in the brain, it is all part of a same line of thought. This is visible because, while you can sometimes have a "two voices / dialectic" way of thinking, you can have the exact same thinking in on
125.
by cauch 4mo ago
Check themselves does not mean: do a loop. It means having self-control on their action and being aware of them. If you ask a system, it will respond, it cannot choose to not respond (even if the response if "I don't want to respo
126.
by cauch 4mo ago
Uh? Human _can_ check themselves. They don't _always_ check themselves. Motor _can_ move vehicle. They don't _always_ move vehicle. LLM _cannot_ check themselves. They _never_ can. It is not that some don't, they just cannot,
127.
by cauch 4mo ago
I don;t get this kind of answers. - A motor is something that create a force to push a vehicle. - Oh yeah? My neighbour car does not have wheels and sit on concrete blocks, the vehicle does not move and yet we all agree it has a motor. So i
128.
by cauch 4mo ago
Of course. But in my explanation "consciousness" or "understanding" is not "finding pattern", it is the pattern itself. CNN are finding patterns, sometimes relevant, sometimes spurious, but I don't think p
129.
by cauch 4mo ago
> The point is that as a solution to certain kinds of optimization problems, consciousness can conceivably be the solution to the optimization problem of predicting the next token of text written by humans who themselves have complex phe
130.
by cauch 4mo ago
I think one could argue the opposite. 1) Good current generation AIs are specifically trained to reduce hallucinations. If we had new AI system that happened to not have hallucinations as a side effect of their training, then it would be co
131.
by cauch 4mo ago
Two problems with that. Firstly, how do you know that the optimal way to highly compress complex information is to understand it? You think it is obvious because you are very familiar with "understanding" as a way to summarise com
132.
by cauch 4mo ago
> That cannot do it without discovering that patterns that make sense out of it. I don't think it's true at all, and I think we have indication that proves it is false. We have "basic" LLM, the ones from 2023. They we
133.
by cauch 4mo ago
I use "consciousness" because it's the point of the original argument, but in fact, I think my whole comment still work well if you replace "consciousness" with "understanding". My point is that the fact t
134.
by cauch 4mo ago
While I agree that a AI system is not just the LLM, for me, the problem is that LLM alone (the one from years ago, which were basically stateless LLM) are already too convincingly looking like real human conversation at first sight. It show
135.
by cauch 4mo ago
I think, for me, the thing is that when you do basic ML, you discover that ML will very often find data pattern that fit the goal but does not correspond to a real mechanism. So, I think there is a flaw in the logic of saying that human tex
136.
by cauch 4mo ago
The article talks about Ted Nelson's demo about hypertext. The first version of the demo was using Nabokov's Pale Fire book. This first version of the demo has been lost. The article is not saying that Nabokov's book has been
137.
by cauch 4mo ago
This does not make any sense at all. If you create a file that you don't intend for the AI to see, the situation should be identical to if you deleted this file before running it. You argument is: "if you delete this file, the AI
138.
by cauch 4mo ago
You can have ten thousand agents, you will always have 1 agent in charge of, say, reading the file in a distant directory, and this agent (which will have minimal context) should be smart enough to realise that this action is unusual. I&#x2
139.
by cauch 4mo ago
Well, the agent should help you by saying "hey, I cannot do this task, but I can bypass the problem by doing this, but obviously it is not something you intended me to do or even something you were aware of, so I will not do it unless
140.
by cauch 5mo ago
The number of reactions was pretty small for Hacker News, and the silent majority probably did not react because they did not have a biased reading of my comments and there is therefore nothing to react to. I don't believe it was diffi
141.
by cauch 5mo ago
I did not say "despite having a fix to hyprland, they don't offer a standalone recipe", I'm referring to the whole behavior: how it is presented, how it is hyped, how there is its own conference, its own merchandising, .
142.
by cauch 5mo ago
Incorrect. I did not say "I want to sell half-furnished houses because I want to fix microwaves", I said "Hey, it comes with a microwave ...". I'm not saying Omarchy is done by people who don't know what they a
143.
by cauch 5mo ago
What? Not at all what I'm saying. The whole thread started with "a solution to install hyprland", which is "the microwave". My expectation is that someone who knows how to fix a microwave will also know how to distr
144.
by cauch 5mo ago
I don't have any problem (I don't use hyprland). The situation is simple, I'm just saying to people the following: Whatever you call what this thing is, it does not look like the people doing it have a strong grip of what is
145.
by cauch 5mo ago
What? Why are you saying "why"? I'm just saying that I trust people who know what they are doing, and if there is someone who does a "superficial" job* but present it as if it is the "whole deal", then the
146.
by cauch 5mo ago
As I've said, I think the discussion about the "real definition of a distribution" is not interesting. It's like idiots who think they are smart when they say "tomato are technically a fruit". What I'm int
147.
by cauch 5mo ago
It is not what I'm saying, of course. I'm saying that if they ended up shipping the house because the house contains their new useful microwave but forget to ship the microwave independently, it is something that should decrease t
148.
by cauch 5mo ago
This is not what I'm saying. I'm not saying that they should "solve my problem", I'm saying that their reputation should be reviewed negatively if they "create a distribution to solve a problem that has no reas
149.
by cauch 5mo ago
So, is the answer "no"? I don't think it changes anything about what I was saying. If indeed dhh helped find a way to install hyprland more easily but failed to also provide a standalone recipe, that does not sound like a goo
150.
by cauch 5mo ago
I don't think the discussion about "is it a distribution or not" is very interesting, but I think the discussion about "should we make clear that this _thing_ is just a bunch of config files rather than the usual work on

More ›