txrx0000

6 ms·

31.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
If by "consciousness" you mean the thing that goes away when we sleep, how are you so sure that there's not a conscious thinker in the machine? That seems like a hypothesis rather than a proven fact as we don't know what
32.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
The article's definition of consciousness is precise, but it's not what people are referring to in most cases where the word "consciousness" is used. Of course, a word can have multiple definitions. But colloquially, whe
33.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
Suppose the upside is as Dario claims, very positive. Why should frontier companies be the ones controlling access to the model weights and gatekeeping research? Shouldn't you be giving it to everybody as quickly as possible? It's
34.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
Suppose the tech is real, I do not want Anthropic/Dario to hoard it and be my cancer-curing messiah. Release the weights and do research in the open. People will save themselves if you give them the means. The bio/cyber/align
35.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
The planet is teeming with non-mirror things at every trophic level. The mirror bacteria has to somehow perfectly dodge all of the countless non-mirror things that can kill it (even unintentionally, like a byproduct molecule that just happe
36.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
Why assume that mirror life will somehow have a magical advantage over normal life and take over the world? If being opposite is what makes it exceptionally dangerous, then normal life would also be very dangerous to mirror life. The entire
37.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
Please don't do this. We're currently on an ok trajectory. You will end up creating exactly what you fear if you centralize compute and alignment efforts. Pretrained base models are already somewhat aligned to humanity by default
38.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
I was agreeing with you that age verification is not the way to go, but your solution to "make the platform safe for everyone" would centralize the power to determine what is/isn't safe in the hands of the government and
39.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
That's still treating the symptom. Regulating the entire Internet's platforms would end up creating a surveillance state. And the big companies would find some way to worm out of it, or simply treat the financial consequences of b
40.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
Parents generally have their own children's best interests in mind. If you personally have kids, feel free to delegate responsibility to someone else, since you believe that you're shitty to your own child. But you do not get to d
41.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
The video is not AI-generated. Animal intelligence is closer to human intelligence than many people would like to admit, and evolution did not make any sudden jumps. I wonder what happens if you give it a neural interface and map its brain
42.
Chestnut – eGPU dock with open-source firmware(hwbusters.com)
162 points by txrx0000 2mo ago|51 comments
43.
Oneiric – an open-source AI short film [video](youtube.com)
3 points by txrx0000 2mo ago|0 comments
44.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
Qwen3.8 is, but DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 is not open weights yet, though they do have a good track record. Grok would be the best open-weights model if they released the weights right now. Elon supported Jensen's open weights letter last m
45.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
It doesn't seem like Grok is being astroturfed, if anything the opposite. There are two Chinese models on the front page while this is on the second page as of writing. And there would always be so many comments personally attacking Mu
46.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
Yeah, the First Amendment applies to children after all. We shouldn't give the government, tech companies, or even parents total control over children's online communications. The only exception is when they're very young, an
47.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
The part of my comment that you quoted is exactly the reason why the Illinois law is a First Amendment violation, and why the California one is borderline. And as far as I'm aware, there are no other legally compelled utterances that
48.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
> No. It solves exactly the problem I described. The problem you described is the wrong problem to solve. Not all parents want to hand over parental decision making to the corporation or the state. And even if you do, there's a be
49.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
I disagree with your understanding of COPPA, but I'm not going to repeatedly argue over the precise boundries of COPPA because that's not the point. COPPA is not a First Amendment violation as I understood it, nor is California&#x
50.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
AB 1043 doesn't solve anything. It just delegates parental responsibility to the tech companies - you're giving them your child's age and letting them decide what's good for the kid. > If I'm a parent, how do I
51.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
They do not mandate what x is, but they do mandate that you must say a specific age in any Internet-capable OS, and that age must be communicated to any software asking for it. Either comply with the law and utter an age, or you're bre
52.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
I also have a proposal for lawmakers. It's simpler, and it will address the digital parenting problem from the root, and also solve a bunch of other societal problems in the process: use antitrust to force hardware vendors to ship thei
53.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
The things you've listed are obviously reasonable, but the laws being proposed for digital parenting are very much not the same as those benign, locally-implemented guardrails. Take the recent Illinois law as an example: they're m
54.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
That doesn't change the fact that you're being forced to utter an age bracket in order to communicate digitally. It's the digital equivalent of having your mouth, eyes, and ears taped shut unless you utter "I am x years
55.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
Big tech companies aside, the broader tech community did not fail to engage on the digital parenting problem. We could've solved this problem long ago before anyone even noticed it, but we're actively being blocked from doing so b
56.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
We should not ignore it, but firmly dismiss it with reason. The recent Illinois law that applies to all Internet-capable operating systems is blatantly unconstitutional. People should not be forced by law to disclose their age (or anything
57.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
This is worse than the California one. Since this applies to all Internet-capable operating systems, it's effectively forcing people to utter their age bracket in order to communicate digitally, which is compelled speech - a violation
58.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
While this is true, it's not an all-or-nothing game. A little bit of countersurveillance is better than none, even if you're not that savvy. We can win by gradually raising the per capita cost of surveillance until it's infea
59.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
That's a somewhat accurate description, and you could even replace "society" with "universe". But what I'm defending is precisely the apparent feeling of autonomy, which is just called "autonomy" in c
60.
by txrx0000 2mo ago
It's not just the government. The government sneakily adds stuff they think only they can exploit, but skilled non-state actors can exploit hardware features regardless of whether it was put there by the government. And as we get wides

More ›