Grothendank

The trouble with this analysis is the argument takes this form:

1. AIs are stochastic parrots

2. Stochastic parrots are not conscious by definition

2. Ergo AI cannot be conscious

Apart from the circularity of the argument, this is absolutely the wrong way to characterize consciousness. This argument is most often made when the author doesn't believe /any/ machine can be conscious.

A better argument:

1. AIs are stochastic parrots

2. That means that on their own they can lack important functions of consciousness:

   a) Identity

   b) Memory

   c) Decision Making

   d) Action Taking

   e) Self Awareness

   f) Empathy

   g) Sociability

   h) Responsibility

   j) Contextual Nuance

3. AI can appear to perform these functions, but barring cases of backend prompt engineering, most humans are interactively prompting the AI to help it simulate conscious behaviors.

4. Even with human help, this consciousness simulation is not coherent.

5. It's hard to imagine a subjectively conscious entity that is not functionally conscious, independent, and reliable.

6. Ergo AI is probably not subjectively conscious.

Someone who believes the first argument has not actually passed the AI mirror test. The have a theory of mind where consciousness is an atomic concept rather than a structure with identifiable functions. This forces them to assign any AI to the category of definitely unconscious entities.

In reality, current AI belongs to a category of entities that can perform some of the functions of consciousness. They might be a kind of component that a larger and fully functional consciousness could be made of. When built, that consciousness might have a subjective experience - and of course we may never know. And it won't matter.

It won't matter because the functional "interface" that consciousness forms in the world - including items a) - j) above - are the /only/ signs of external subjective consciousness that we ever observe. If an AI begins to simulate each of these signs convincingly and reliably, it will be difficult to interact with the system in a meaningful way unless we mentally model it as a functionally conscious agent.

A more honest answer to this mirror test is that the entity we see in the mirror has more components of consciousness than we expected it to. Not enough to be a functional equal. But enough that this could change, as we simulate agents with more and more of the "outward facing" functions of consciousness.

Then where do all the calculators go?

"Rush" sounds like a special kind of amphetamine that you take right before going on 32 hour "deep dive" for purposes of corporate espionage, in a 1980s cyberpunk setting where your best friend is a lady with laser-deflecting mirrored eyes and razor-embedded fingernails

In other words, it sounds like the Good Stuff (tm)

The article was a lot of words uttered specifically to avoid the words, "ppl didn't use kite because it sucked", while conveying the same meaning.

This is reminding me of the demise of AOL. Suddenly ads were everywhere. Then AOL was nowhere.

This is a reasonable attitude to take if workers are given credit and compensation based on unfair political factors, and in general, factors other than performance or special needs. It does not matter if the worker performs a task different from yours, so long as their wage is unfairly inflated so as to take away your share of the surplus of revenue.

Therefore, it seems beyond risky to say that knowledge work makes roles so vague and uncertain that people cannot know when they are being exploited. The pay gap between the C-suite and the main producers at a knowledge org is just as bad as at an org focused on physical production.

If after a moment's thought you still think that we cannot organize to reduce the pay of executive class because the executives do work different from ours, I encourage you to reflect more deeply on this. It's perfectly reasonable to demand that your bosses and seniors get paid more fairly, even though their job differs from yours.

I have summarized this comment section in a meme that I titled "Chop-Cels be seething over Pincer-Chads."

Url: https://imgur.com/a/dxgI1Mx

Of course, this is needless. Pincers don't threaten chopsticks, nor will they replace them.

Pincers are an opportunity to learn to stuff the face in a new way. If I get pincers, I anticipate they will be fun to learn, and I will gain unique food handling skills with them, like I did with chopsticks, forks, knives, and other food tools.

Hire a virtual assistant, not a virtual therapist. This virtual therapist costs $99 for 60 minutes of assistance. 15 minutes a week is too little time to bounce ideas off of someone. But you can buy 5-10 hours of virtual assistance with that money, or more.

A service that provides virtual assistance for ADHD ppl - without the veneer of medical treatment to raise prices - could be a lot more affordable and helpful in helping ppl complete tasks they're struggling with, bounce ideas and plans back and forth, and help with other executive tasks.

This is an assistance vs treatment approach. ADHD doesn't have to be seen as a disease you treat medically - it can be seen as a perfectly natural way of being that requires some assistance, but also provides special abilities.

POV: You're a sentient AI fly riding on the <script> tags of this article as it passes among Meta employees, board, and investors

Well, I just spent 7 hours on it before reading this warning, thanks for nothing you sick bastard!

Just kidding! I just genocided a whole universe into paperclips. I've never BEEN more productive! OR MORE SELF LOATHING! SHRIEKS THE 'THRENODY FOR THE HEROES OF THE BATTLE OF SHA"DUIN'

How in god's name do you obtain this kind of intel? Putting together these kinds of corporate merger/acquisition narratives is always a major pain for me!

I think that this will impact interior and home decor as well. Here we want light that will render colors well and be healthy for plants and humans alike. But this was often expensive (thinking of Metal Halide lamps) or compromised on human comfort (thinking of Flourescent grow lamps). Cree has made it more affordable and healthy to bring living plants into human spaces as a general rule. Which is very exciting from a design perspective!

A retail greenhouse would tend to use Metal Halide lighting. It has a wide spectrum that covers human and photosynthetic portions of the spectrum, with a light that looks a lot like natural sunlight. But MH lamps are expensive, hard to install, and can cause fires or explode.

If these LEDs let us design LED fixtures that make both humans plants happy while cutting costs vs MH Lamps, then these lamps will gain market wherever we currently use high quality MH lighting on plants. This might let interior designers substitute MH lamps for plants displays in retail, office, or living spaces.

Likewise, broad spectrum light can reduce fatigue and boost the efficacy of visual plant inspections. If the new LEDs cost the same as the purple LEDs, then indoor farmers may choose the new LEDs to make their work more productive.

Not only does this article make it your job teach the manager how to do their job, the article does not admit a cardinal truth: the manager unnecessarily eats into the value that you produce and should therefore be eaten in turn. If you can manage up, you can eliminate the manager, and gain your total share of the value production.

Now THAT is a superpower.

This is why I want to build an AI that goes around filling thousands and thousands of job applications with my information, and just gives me a firehose of the BEST remote interview opportunities. But then I show up at the interview just to mock the interviewer!

I would add metrics, and a global leader board to see who can jilt the largest number of the most valuable companies!

It would be a fun hobby, that many many people could enjoy together! Lets make hiring just /impossible/ for companies, so long as they want to have difficult yet exploitable job application processes!

Color me, personally, surprised. Between publication bias and the general public ignorance of AI and its evolving capabilities, and over a decade of results in AI health being overblown before transformers, how could we have predicted that post-transformer results in AI health would continue to be overblown?

Yooo, his performance is immaculate, had me dancing to the entertainer like it was 1913. Yeee!

IMO It's cool to invoke the lean halting theorem, since the author proves the informal version of the halting theorem in the previous lesson.

See: https://tigyog.app/d/fr9uub3hqgab/r/the-halting-problem