qarl

4 ms·

61.
by qarl 26d ago
Please don't insult me.
62.
by qarl 26d ago
I don't know the details but apparently it has something to do with multiprocess contention for the GPU and batch sizing.
63.
by qarl 26d ago
When human input is involved, like I described elsewhere, it happens frequently.
64.
by qarl 26d ago
I ask because I truly don't understand what he's saying. Clearly we have different ideas about consciousness and I have no idea where we diverge. He seems to be saying that determinism and consciousness are incompatible. But we
65.
by qarl 26d ago
In your original point you seemed to be painting everything with the same brush. There was no "90%" mentioned. And you still seem to be exaggerating - I suspect that the number of projects that can be recreated easily is much l
66.
by qarl 26d ago
It sounds like you disagree with determinism. But that's a well worn argument and determinism has won, albeit in an odd sort of detente.
67.
by qarl 26d ago
It doesn't seem self evident to me, no. I suspect the reasoning is connected to free will vs. determinism. But no, I see no inconsistency. You'll have to actually point it out.
68.
by qarl 26d ago
So long as you agree there are gems - it's not all shit.
69.
by qarl 27d ago
> Confused definitions of consciousness can give really confused ideas about ethical behavior regards "intelligent" computer programs. Is that what's going on? If these things were conscious, then their creators wouldn&#x
70.
by qarl 27d ago
Yes. In theory they are deterministic. In practice, not so much.
71.
by qarl 27d ago
I think this debate is rooted in our instinctual beliefs about fairness. An organism in a social group needs to decide how to react to the brutish behavior of its peers. And so Mother Nature has encoded a good strategy in our brains. But
72.
by qarl 27d ago
Yes, in theory, of course. In practice - on a multitasking OS with input from multiple human users - it's hard to get it deterministic because of that GPU scheduling thing I mentioned.
73.
by qarl 27d ago
> I would argue that if a human has absolutely zero change, mental or physical, no atom of their being is modified, then no they did not experience suffering. That's an interesting point... but I'd argue it falls into the same
74.
by qarl 27d ago
Naw - computers are really deterministic. It's hard to get them to behave otherwise. As I understand it, if you turn down the temperature to 0 you get repeatable behavior - EXCEPT - on large servers with lots of users - the GPU can so
75.
by qarl 27d ago
> A conscious machine that always answer the very exact same thing, formulated the exact same way, bit for bit, to a query is, well, quite a weird kind of "consciousness". You'll need to explain why.
76.
by qarl 27d ago
Yes. They're trained on human behavior. Whether or not they genuinely have feelings - they sure as heck behave as though they do. And when you treat people well, they do better work for you. No brainer.
77.
by qarl 27d ago
Birch, The Edge of Sentience (2024), ch. 16 - "simply no way to assess sentience in an LLM" Schwitzgebel, AI and Consciousness (2025) - "we won't know before we've already manufactured thousands or millions of dispu
78.
by qarl 27d ago
I disagree. When I started having my agents do an independent code review before allowing a commit - the code quality improved dramatically. I don't have numbers... but by and large the errors mostly went away. I went from strugglin
79.
by qarl 27d ago
HA! Which one of you is stalking me? It's creepy, you know. Not normal behavior for a well adjusted person.
80.
by qarl 27d ago
Oh. You weren't being sarcastic. Well - ignore me please - I was answering something you did not say.
81.
by qarl 27d ago
I spent 20 years trying to resist the rise of Trump. The moment the U.S. turned its back on the Geneva Conventions, which were specifically designed to stop the atrocities of fascism - it was extremely obvious what was happening. I screame
82.
by qarl 27d ago
Yes - I am delighted with what I can now do. Simultaneously I am terrified of what others will be able to do.
83.
by qarl 27d ago
If they wanted to train an LLM to play chess they could easily do so. But nobody wants that.
84.
by qarl 27d ago
I have a friend who earnestly told me I sound like an evangelical about AI. He worried for my sanity. I told him that if I saw that Jesus was alive, walking amongst us, performing actual miracles - I would definitely try to convert him. I
85.
by qarl 27d ago
My wife plays the web games from the New York Times. There was one she liked but she wanted to change the rules. Of course it took Claude Code about 10 minutes to do it, and she was delighted.
86.
by qarl 27d ago
Did you see the project that displays the birds it's heard onto an e-paper display that looks like a print? It was pretty cool. Nothing at all like a bowel movement.
87.
by qarl 27d ago
Yeah. But I'd argue that it really isn't possible to know what is going to happen. But yeah. I'm trying to focus on the positive aspects. Because what else can you do?
88.
by qarl 27d ago
> To me, if my systems were attacked and I was damaged I would notify the FBI Maybe they traded that for money? I would.
89.
by qarl 27d ago
Not really. Cohen, Hamri, Geva & Globerson, "LM vs LM: Detecting Factual Errors via Cross Examination": Cross-examination "detects over 70% of the incorrect claims while maintaining a high precision of >80%".
90.
by qarl 28d ago
Let the AI renaissance begin!

More ›