drdeca

8 ms·

91.
by drdeca 7mo ago
Hm. It shouldn’t be too hard to add something to models to make them do that, right? I guess for that they would need to know the user’s time zone? Can one typically determine a user’s timezone in JavaScript without getting permissions? I f
92.
by drdeca 7mo ago
Ideally, sufficiently powerful AI would not be created unless the necessary safety mechanisms are established. But also, that’s a different kind of asymmetry?
93.
by drdeca 7mo ago
Not convincing
94.
by drdeca 7mo ago
Many people don’t think there is a moral case against training a model on copyrighted data without obtaining a license to do that specifically.
95.
by drdeca 7mo ago
I don’t see why you think that AGI can reverse the effects of another AGI?
96.
by drdeca 7mo ago
> By definition you cannot have someone who is the most informed about everything. This is not true-by-definition . It may be true, but not by-definition. If there were an omniscient person, they would be the most informed about everythi
97.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Anthropic? ChatGPT is the one affiliated with Microsoft.
98.
by drdeca 8mo ago
I believe I answered the question? You asked whether these quantum fields have values at points. I believe there is a field-of-sorts, but that unless spacetime is discrete, the value of it at an individual point isn’t really a meaningful qu
99.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Something which I found surprising is that it appears that a Gaussian random field in more than one dimension apparently has to be distribution valued, such that with probability 1 one can’t really evaluate it a particular point. Even setti
100.
by drdeca 8mo ago
I didn’t mean to imply that the harmful effects of something can’t be worth it for the beneficial effects of that thing. Yeah, if someone is trapped, doing something that frees them and also breaks their arm, may well be an appropriate acti
101.
by drdeca 8mo ago
They are saying that judgements of what qualifies as harm is something like a judgement of what is good, or what is right or wrong. That’s not the same thing as evaluating whether something causes pain. You can measure whether something cau
102.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Hm, I think you are taking the language “takes every path” too literally. Like, set aside the “infinitely many paths” issue for a moment, and consider just two paths. A quantum superposition of two paths doesn’t mean “it took this path and
103.
by drdeca 8mo ago
You seem to be asking about “divine hiddenness”. I don’t know why God doesn’t make His existence more obvious to those that don’t seek Him. Like I quoted above, his ways are above our ways. That’s not to say that the reason is definitely be
104.
by drdeca 8mo ago
I wouldn’t say it “runs on” virtual particles per se. I think the virtual particle terms are more tracking the interactions between different fields. I would say it runs on quantum fields on a curved spacetime, yeah. And, as for what precis
105.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Your concept of “explains” seems like nonsense to me. “what’s the mechanism?”? “[…] but that doesn't tell you what it is. It just tells you how it behaves […]”? A thing is what it does. C.f. the Yoneda lemma. Again, your complaints sou
106.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Well, what exactly an “idea” is might be a little unclear, but I don’t think it clear that the complexity of ideas that result from combining previously obtained ideas would be bounded by the complexity of the ideas they are combinations of
107.
by drdeca 8mo ago
I don’t expect the particle has a one single path it takes. This is just an example of reality telling us our assumptions (“each particle has a single well-defined path it takes”) were mistaken. “It’s claimed that the particle bounces off
108.
by drdeca 8mo ago
That makes little sense to me. “Can’t be further probed”? A thing behaves in some way. If you do things, things happen. One can do certain measurements about how things behave, and then record these measurements. What would it even mean for
109.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Asking what it “is made of” seems like a somewhat ambiguous question to me. Still, the answer would not be “mathematical abstractions that fit the data”, but “ these mathematical abstractions”. (And, there is a lot of meaning behind these
110.
by drdeca 8mo ago
If they had a correct point, the appeal to Gödel’s results did not help to justify it.
111.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Sometimes nature tells us that the questions we are inclined to ask, are flawed questions. The “What path did the photon take?” question is one of those times. The answer to the question is Mu. Similar to the questions “How much phlogiston
112.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Your conception of an “explanation of reality” is deeply flawed.
113.
by drdeca 8mo ago
The universe is not obligated to appeal to your aesthetic tastes in its innermost functioning. Maybe you aren’t going to be satisfied with the sort of complicated mathematics which appears to be correct (or, on the right track). If you ha
114.
by drdeca 8mo ago
Gödel’s incompleteness says almost nothing about this. I wish people wouldn’t try to apply it in ways that it very clearly is not applicable to. An environment living in Conway’s Game of Life could be quite capable of hypothesizing that it
115.
by drdeca 8mo ago
This makes some jumps I was unable to follow. like, the part where they get a_i log p_i , well, the sum of this over i is gives the number, but it seemed like they were treating this as… a_i being a random variable associated to p_i , or so
116.
by drdeca 8mo ago
They didn’t say “statistical model”, they said “linear algebra”. It very much appears that time evolution is unitary (with the possible exception of the born rule). That’s a linear algebra concept. Generally, the structure you describe does
117.
by drdeca 8mo ago
> If that were the case, we would only really love the games we grew up with. I’m not sure that’s true? Like, perhaps the preference might generalize from the several games one did play as a child to other games which are similar to the
118.
by drdeca 8mo ago
I like this commentary on that passage : https://detective-pony.tumblr.com/post/96180330151/pages-21-...
119.
by drdeca 9mo ago
That’s not what moral relativism is. Utilitarianism, for example, is not (necessarily) relativistic, and would (for pretty much all utility functions that people propose) endorse lying in some situations. Moral realism doesn’t mean that the
120.
by drdeca 9mo ago
I think you are interpreting “absolute” in a different way? I’m not the top level commenter, but my claim is that there are moral facts, not that in every situation, the morally correct behavior is determined by simple rules such as “Never

More ›