Readit News2. Our ability to replicate something gives zero information on its origin. I’m not sure I understand the algorithm comment
3. Sure, GP simplified a bit too much there. Your comment is consistent with modern models of evolution. Each genome has a pool of random variations, which may or may not be expressed in an organism. Each organism is a test of those gene expressions. A genome changes over time when an organism passes this test (e.g. reproduces), increasing the expression of its genes across the population. This occurs in parallel for many possible variations.
—
Ah, I should have read the rest of your comment first, but I’ll leave this here anyway. I don’t think your explanation is valid— we are biologically and socially primed for religious ideology, but its use as a world model is very limited. We will eventually find answers to these questions, as the ratchet of scientific progress clicks along. Religion has never been useful in the same way
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monument_to_the_laboratory_mou...
I'm not knowledgeable enough to untangle all of the studies where these terms are also used, which I guess is part of the problem this paper is pointing out, that the terminology/naming is confusing.
Is this saying if you have blood pressure problems you might also be at risk of ASD.
Or opposite, if you have ASD, you might have more risk of blood pressure problems.
"The name AVP refers to the hormone’s role in increasing vascular resistance and regulating blood pressure (via AVP receptor"
"Given the emerging evidence for central AVP signaling abnormalities in ASD, we would expect individuals with ASD, or a subgroup of them, to be at increased risk of AVP-related medical conditions and symptoms. "
GPT-4 is generally not competitive with domain specialists (outside areas where machines have already been competitive for some time). That of course doesn't mean it isn't valuable - but it becomes more for human augmentation than replacement.