Step 1: Give Robots Voting Rights
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Plot twist, all those Robots are actually under direct control of the Evil Corporation Inc. and they already won every future election.
Long Live the Cyberlife CEO!
What’s wrong with large labia majora?
I knew I should’ve shown him Electro-Gonorrhea: The Noisy Killer.
Robosexuality is wrong!!!
He hasn’t seen the video?
Look, I’m not robophobic. Some of my best friends are cyborgs. I just don’t want them living in my neighborhood, you know?
Found the robosexual
Big difference with cyborg and robots. cyborgs are augmented humans.
Yeah, jeez, that sort of mechanophic language should be illegal
Kiss robots all you like I’m cool with it. Just don’t do it around me.
one joke
“bigots reject what they’re unfamiliar with, and if I’m honest, it’ll probably end up happening to me too”
Is about as far from the one joke as you can get.
“LOL My future son will identify as an apache attack helicopter probably haha”
It’s the same joke.
It’s not the same joke because, it’s a more honest attempt to imagine a plausible scenario in which unconscious prejudice may manifest. Apache attack helicopter is obviously absurd. AI sentience is just
very unlikelysomething that is not currently a prejudice we find ourselves exposed to and may speculate we’d end up being adverse to
Plot twist: It’s gramps that likes the robots and the kids like the feel of real skin.
Brings a whole new meaning to binary and nonbinary.
I’d like to collapse her wave function, sorry, only qubisexuals allowed.
sexy action at a distance !
deleted by creator
But Boomers already have no sense of privacy. That’s not a generational divide issue.
What’s all this about having to accept NEW TOS for Borderlands 2. I purchased the game five years ago, but if I want to play today i have to accept a greater loss of privacy!
When I was young you would find out about a video game from the movies! And they were complete! Any you couldn’t take the servers offline, because they didn’t exist!
But for real, fuck Randy Pitchford
Lovin Spoonful wrote a song about it in 1968:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9Ic_9ehFxU
Why must every generation think their folks are square? And no matter where their heads are they know mom’s ain’t there 'Cause I swore when I was small that I’d remember when I knew what’s wrong with them
Determined to remember all the cardinal rules Like sun showers are legal grounds for cuttin’ school I know I have forgotten maybe one or two And I hope that I recall them all before the baby’s due And I know he’ll have a question or two
Like “Hey, pop, can I go ride my zoom? It goes two hundred miles an hour suspended on balloons And can I put a droplet of this new stuff on my tongue, and imagine frothing dragons while you sit and wreck your lungs?” And I must be permissive, understanding of the younger generation.
And "Hey, pop, my girlfriend’s only three She’s got her own videophone, and she’s takin’ LSD And now that we’re best friends, she wants to give a bit to me But what’s the matter, daddy? How come you’re turnin’ green? Can it be that you can’t live up to your dreams?
I like that song. Perhaps a perfect encapsulation of some specific part of the 60s mythos. I can only speculate.
And can I put a droplet of this new stuff on my tongue, and imagine frothing dragons while you sit and wreck your lungs?
Pretty good line
Let’s not pretend statistical models are approaching humanity. The companies who make these statistical model algorithms proved they couldn’t in 2020 by OpenAI and also 2023 DeepMind papers they published.
To reiterate, with INFINITE DATA AND COMPUTE TIME the models cannot approach human error rates. It doesn’t think, it doesn’t emulate thinking, it statistically resembles thinking to some number below 95% and completely and totally lacks permanence in it’s statistical representation of thinking.
I think most people understand that these LLM cannot think or reason, they’re just really good tools that can analyze data, recognize patterns, and generate relevant responses based on parameters and context. The people who treat LLM chatbot like they’re people have much deeper issues than just ignorance.
The people who treat LLM chatbot like they’re people have much deeper issues than just ignorance.
I don’t know if it’s an urban myth, but I’ve heard about 20% of LLM inference time and electricity is being spend on “hello” and “thank you” prompts. :)
It’s a very real thing. So much so that OpenAI actually came out and publicly complained about how it’s apparently costing the company millions.
Then you clearly haven’t been paying attention, because just as zealously as you defend it’s nonexistent use cases there are people defending the idea that it operates similar to how a human or animal thinks.
The difference is that the brain is recursive while these models are linear, but the fundamental structure is similar.
The difference is that a statistical model is not a replacement for an emulation. Their structure is wildly different.
Bold words coming from a human. You’re just some talking meat programmed through trial-and-error by evolution into approximating real thought. You weren’t designed with intention, you’re just a machine for regurgitating survival strategies. Fuck, eat, shit, that’s your purpose. There’s no intelligence behind the wet sacs you call your eyes.
How many electricity powered machines processing binary data via crystal prisms did we see evolve organically?
Organic intelligence is a myth. You’re a philosophical zombie, imitating intelligence. Evolution does not produce intelligent creatures. You have no sensations, no consciousness, not even knowledge in the proper sense. Just bunches of neurons mindlessly imitating the external appearance of intelligence.
My point is that those people are a very small minority, and they suffer from issues that go beyond their ignorance of these how these models work.
I think they’re more common than you realize. I think people ignorance of how these models work is the commonly held stance for the general public.
Ten years ago I was certain that a natural language voice interface to a computer was going to stay science fiction permanently. I was wrong. In ten years time you may also be wrong.
Well, if you want one that’s 98% accurate then you were actually correct that it’s science fiction for the foreseeable future.
And yet I just forsaw a future in which it wasn’t. AI has already exceeded Trump levels of understanding, intelligence and truthfulness. Why wouldn’t it beat you or I later? Exponential growth in computing power and all that.
The returns from the computing power scale much faster than the very static rate (and in many sectors plateauing rate) of growth in computing power, but if you believe OpenAI and Deepmind then they’ve already proven INFINITE processing power cannot reach it from their studies in 2020 and also in 2023.
They already knew it wouldn’t succeed, they always knew, and they told everyone, but we’re still surrounded by people like you being grifted by it all.
EDIT: I must be talking to a fucking bot because I already linked those scientific articles earlier, too.
Can you go into a bit more details on why you think these papers are such a home run for your point?
-
Where do you get 95% from, these papers don’t really go into much detail on human performance and 95% isn’t mentioned in either of them
-
These papers are for transformer architectures using next token loss. There are other architectures (spiking, tsetlin, graph etc) and other losses (contrastive, RL, flow matching) to which these particular curves do not apply
-
These papers assume early stopping, have you heard of the grokking phenomenon? (Not to be confused with the Twitter bot)
-
These papers only consider finite size datasets, and relatively small ones at that. I.e. How many “tokens” would a 4 year old have processed? I imagine that question should be somewhat quantifiable
-
These papers do not consider multimodal systems.
-
You talked about permeance, does a RAG solution not overcome this problem?
I think there is a lot more we don’t know about these things than what we do know. To say we solved it all 2-5 years ago is, perhaps, optimistic
You claim to be some kind of expert but you can’t even read the paper? Lmao.
y rude pls
(not parent commenter)
-
Thanks for the abuse. I love it when I’m discussing something with someone and they start swearing at me and calling me names because I disagree. Really makes it fun. /s You can fuck right off yourself too, you arrogant tool.
But let’s not also pretend people aren’t already falling in love with them. Or thinking they’re god, etc.
Some people are ok with lowering their ability to make judgements to convince themselves that LLMs are human like. That’s the other solution to the Turing Test.
We used to think some people aren’t capable of human intellect. Had a whole science to prove it too.
If modern computers can reproduce sentience, then so can older computers. Thats just how general computing is. You really gonna claim magnetic tape can think? That punch-cards and piston transistors can produce the same phenomenon as tens of billions of living brain cells?
That in general seems more plausible than doing it specifically with an LLM.
Slightly yeah, but I’m still overall pretty skeptical. We still don’t really understand consciousness. It’d certainly be convenient if the calculating machines we understand and have everywhere could also “do” whatever it is that causes consciousness… but it doesn’t seem particularly likely.
analog-based and millenialpilled
