I really wish Google had some kind of global “I don’t want any identifiably AI-generated content hitting my retinas, ever” checkbox.
Too much to ask, surely.
Readit NewsHis name was "Mads Mikkelsen", like the actor? Either he gave a fake name or this story is made up.
That's like saying a news story about an American was fake because his name was "Michael Jordan" or "David Robinson." Some names are really common.
That’s not JD Vance it’s Marc Andreessen!
Nah, the top of the head isn't pointy enough for it to be Andreessen.
FeteCommuniste commented on Guess I'm a rationalist now scottaaronson.blog/?p=890... · Posted by u/nsoonhui
I think I'm missing something important.
My understanding of "Rationalists" is that they're followers of rationalism; that is, that truth can be understood only through intellectual deduction, rather than sensory experience.
I'm wondering if this is a _different_ kind of "Rationalist." Can someone explain?
The easiest way to understand their usage of the term "rational" might be to think of it as the negation of the term "irrational" (where the latter refers mostly to cognitive biases). Not as a contrast with "empirical."
FeteCommuniste commented on Guess I'm a rationalist now scottaaronson.blog/?p=890... · Posted by u/nsoonhui
No actual person talks like that —- and if they really did, they’ve taken on the role of a fictional character. Which says a lot about the clientele either way.
I skimmed a bit here and there after that but this comes off as plain grandiosity. Even the title is a line you can imagine a hollywood character speaking out loud as they look into the camera, before giving a smug smirk.
I assumed that the stuff in quotes was a summary of the general gist of the conversations he had, not a word for word quote.
Historically, in the West at least, the ability or inability to reason one's way to the existence of God determined whether you needed to rely on faith or not.
https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/docum...
Nice, paragraph 5 and he's already into "evolution is fiction and commies love it."
FeteCommuniste commented on <Blink> and <Marquee> (2020) danq.me/2020/11/11/blink-... · Posted by u/ghssds
I was expecting you to tell me that all of these moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain.
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe..."
FeteCommuniste commented on If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued betterthanrandom.substack... · Posted by u/weltview
You do need a certain degree of leverage. I think especially in the tech sector, people often do not realize how much leverage they have, and how a little pushback can go a long way. It is sometimes worth asking and testing: “Are they really going to fire me for this?”
A lot of us have jobs where the answer to that question is often "I don't know."
FeteCommuniste commented on The Future of Comments Is Lies, I Guess aphyr.com/posts/388-the-f... · Posted by u/zdw
I think that, ultimately, systems that humans use to interact on the internet will have to ditch anonymity. If people can't cheaply and reliably distinguish human output from LLM output, and people care about only talking to humans, we will need to establish authenticity via other mechanisms. In practice that means PKI or web of trust (or variants/combinations), plus reputation systems.
Nobody wants this, because it's a pain, it hurts privacy (or easily can hurt it) and has other social negatives (cliques forming, people being fake to build their reputation, that episode of Black Mirror, etc.). Anonymity is useful like cash is useful. But if someone invents a machine that can print banknotes that fool 80% of people, eventually cash will go out of circulation.
I think the big question is: How much do most people actually care about distinguishing real and fake comments? It hurts moderators a lot, but most people (myself included) don't see this pain directly and are highly motivated by convenience.
Well if I’m in a discussion I’d like to know whether the other participants are actual people or just slopmachines (“AIs”).
It's an impressive one, to say the least. It's worth taking a closer look and weighing the excellence created by the human mind before completely dismissing the article's arguments.
> Ironically, the author could well benefit from running this slop through an llm to make it more professional.
True, that would effectively strip out all the heart and soul from the prose.