Well, I know what folk can't do.
Readit Newssph commented on The Tor Project is switching to Rust itsfoss.com/news/tor-rust... · Posted by u/giuliomagnifico
sph commented on UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16 alecmuffett.com/article/1... · Posted by u/nvarsj
This is a clearly terrible idea. It's clear to us, at least, not to them. As is on the public record, there are three proponents behind this amendment. They and their contact details are:
LORD NASH [Tory, contactholmember@parliament.uk] BARONESS CASS [Crossbench / 'independent', rivisn@parliament.uk ("staff")] BARONESS BENJAMIN [Liberal Democrat - which particularly disappoints me – benjaminf@parliament.uk]
All three can be contacted by sending an email to contactholmember@parliament.uk using the proper form of address as detailed in https://members.parliament.uk/member/4270/contact
If you're reading this website and are either living in the UK or are a British citizen I strongly urge you to write a personalised and above all polite email stating with evidence why they are misguided. The "think of the children" brigade is strong – you may well be able to persuade these individuals why it is a bad idea.
As if that's gonna change their minds. You'd have a better chance by stuffing a £20 note in the envelope.
The debug log was not without its charms.
The article was not bad yet not my favorite.
That's not ideal. I'm not a fan of this.
I can do it.
My claim is that an llm acts the same way (or superset) to how a person with short term memory would behave if the only mode they could communicate with was text. Do you agree?
That is not a proof, that is opinion.
And I do not agree. LLMs are literally incapable of understanding the concept of truth, right/wrong, knowledge and not-knowledge. It seems pretty crucial to be able to tell if you know something or not for any level of human-level intelligence.
Again, this conversation has been had in many variations constantly since LLMs were on the rise, and we can't rehash the same points over and over. If one believes LLMs are capable of cognition, they should offer formal proof first, otherwise we're just wasting our time.
That said, I wonder if there are major differences in cognition between humans, because there is no way I would look at how my brain works and think "oh, this LLM is capable of the same level of cognition as I am." Not because I am ineffably smart, but because LLMs are utterly simplistic in comparison to even a fruit fly.
The memo itself is an excellent walk through historical bubbles, debt, financing, technological innovation, and much more, all written in a way that folks with a cursory knowledge of economics can reasonably follow along with.
A+, excellent writing.
The real meat is in the postscript though, because that's where the author puts to paper the very real (and very unaddressed) concerns around dwindling employment in a society where not only does it provide structure and challenge for growth, but is also fundamentally required for survival.
> I get no pleasure from this recitation. Will the optimists please explain why I’m wrong?
This is what I, and many other, smarter "AI Doomers" than myself have been asking for quite some time, that nobody has been able or willing to answer. We want to be wrong on this. We want to see what the Boosters and Evangelists allegedly see, we want to join you and bring about this utopia you keep braying about. Yet when we hold your feet to the fire, we get empty platitudes - "UBI", or "the government has to figure it out", or "everyone will be an entrepreneur", or some other hollow argument devoid of evidence or action. We point to AI companies and their billionaire owners blocking regulation while simultaneously screeching about how more regulation is needed, and are brushed off as hysterical or ill-informed.
I am fundamentally not opposed to a world where AI displaces the need for human labor. Hell, I know exactly what I'd do in such a world, and I think it's an excellent thought exercise for everyone to work through (what would you do if money and labor were no longer necessary for survival?). My concern - the concerns of so many, many of us - are that the current systems and incentives in place lead to the same outcome: no jobs, no money, and no future for the vast majority of humanity. The author sees that too, and they're way smarter than I am in the economics department.
I'd really, really love to see someone demonstrate to us how AI will solve these problems. The fact nobody can or will speaks volumes.
The sad reality is that no one in tech and most sciences is concerned with ethics. Our society has internalised the ideology that technological progress is always good and desirable in whatever form it comes about, and this will be our undoing.
Why are you so sure it is not capable of cognition?
Nice try. The onus is on you to prove the extraordinary claim that we have invented actual artificial cognition.
Maybe now we will start seeing a reversion to the people in it for the passion.