mallowdram

16 ms·

271.
by mallowdram 1y ago
People without signs of mental illness are experiencing psychosis using LLMs. Psychosis is not indicative of mental illness, in fact people without any signs can experience temporary psychosis. Hypnopompic hallucinations are so common that
272.
by mallowdram 1y ago
All AI does is arbitrarily speed up indirectness in arbitrary signals by predicting a next word. Course-correcting the arbitrary never reaches directness or specifics. This is the expected outcome of metaphors (words) pretending to have mea
273.
by mallowdram 1y ago
The tech was never ready, it's built on faulty units. Pull the plug.
274.
by mallowdram 1y ago
Listing the conditions, dichotomizing the frameworks counting/measurement is the farthest from psycho-babble. Anyone with knowledge of analog knows these terms. And enough to know analog doesn't simulate anything. And intelligence
275.
by mallowdram 1y ago
Engineers are so close-minded, you can't see the freight train bearing down on the industry. All to science's advantage replacing engineers. Interestingly, if you dissect that last entry, I've just made the case measurement (
276.
by mallowdram 1y ago
Neural/spatial syntax. Analoga of differentials. The code to operate this gets built before the component. If language doesn't really mean anything, then automating it in geometry is worse than problematic. The solution is startin
277.
by mallowdram 1y ago
Sorry, 2 billion years of neurobiology beats 60 years of NLP/LLMs which knows less to nothing about language since "arbitrary points can never be refined or defined to specifics" check your corners and know your inputs. The b
278.
by mallowdram 1y ago
I'd know cutting-edge linguistics and signaling theory well beyond Shannon to parse this, not NLP or engineering reduction. What I've stated is extremely coherent to Systemic Functional Linguists. Beyond this point engineers actua
279.
by mallowdram 1y ago
The units themselves are meaningless without context. The point of existence, action, tasks is to solve the arbitrariness in language. Tasks refute language, not the other way around. This may be incoherent as the explanation is scientific,
280.
by mallowdram 1y ago
We have a substantial grasp of the allocortex to make significant probes into working memory that relate to semantic memory, episodic thought, emotion and certain senses. The very idea we understand that Sharp Wave Ripples encode this and t
281.
by mallowdram 1y ago
Words do not function as communication. You asked a pointless question. It has no function except to extract values from actions: it was subjective, arbitrary. Until CS grasps this, it is irrelevant. All the symptoms from LLM failure rates
282.
by mallowdram 1y ago
I'm lead dev in a start-up that applies coordination dynamics to spatial-syntax. I probably know quite a bit more than you do about what I'm doing.
283.
by mallowdram 1y ago
Both Churchland's are out of date. Note the references above, this is a neurobiological, dynamic approach they're not party to. If you don't know what those are or optic flow, neural reuse are, then study them. Trad Neuroscie
284.
by mallowdram 1y ago
It's science challenging CS. If there are no such things as symbols and metaphors in reality, and these are arbitrary, how possibly does it stay referential? It can't. It falls apart, language can't produce itself. It was den
285.
by mallowdram 1y ago
No it's neurobiological, psychology and particularly cog-sci is in error, as both place language ahead of concepts. Our understanding of reality per language is post hoc, it's an illusion. Life is always ad hoc, any violation of a
286.
by mallowdram 1y ago
Of course world models are linguistic. What working memory or neural syntax bypasses linguistic externals when the term is in of itself linguistic. The entire concept of model is linguistic in origin. Biology doesn't have models.
287.
by mallowdram 1y ago
Neurobiology has proved this, just read Buzsaki or Northoff. The brain doesn't need models, it needs differences.
288.
by mallowdram 1y ago
No what you're describing is arbitrary and idiosyncratic. The brain doesn't use that to survive, it doesn't need them. Anything external to that is completely separate from thought. What you're describing is an arbitrary