briangriffinfan

I think one of the great lessons of our age will be that things being apparently equivalent, or in more applied terms "good enough," are not equal to equality.

What is this corresponding Wikipedia page?

In my personal opinion it is reasonable to define "reasoning" as requiring sentience.

It's not someone "deciding," it's a black box algorithm.

How can you learn about how people spoke and the patterns that dictate how that changed over time if all you care about is what is considered technically correct at the moment?

The crux of the problem is "what is reasoning?" Of course it's easy enough to call the outputs "equivalent enough" and then use that to say the processes are therefore also "equivalent enough."

Could it be said that reasoning requires intent?

My manfriend is on ozempic and he always complains about how it makes him alternate between constipation and diahrrea. So it was funny to me to see it become a meme.

See: "This is an impulse with no justification." In that sense yes my justification absolutely can be vibes, and it is! Suck it!

Would I be crazy to say that the difference between reasoning and computation is sentience? This is an impulse with no justification but it rings true to me.

Yes yes yes we're all aware that these are word predictors and don't actually know anything or reason. But these random dice are somehow able to give reasonably seemingly well-educated answers a majority of the time and the fact that these programs don't technically know anything isn't going to slow the train down any.

I don't know the reason for the disparity, but I do know we've spent... how many decades at this point? trying and failing to correct for it. At some point I feel compelled to consider the possibility that our scope is wrong.

I have GOT to find a way to describe more things like this.

From my perspective this is like doing a study on how much the average person can bench and then concluding that society is unfair towards women because they bench less. That is to say I just don't take it for granted that the conclusion is "society is unfair (in this particular regard)."

No, I am obviously not saying math ends with algebra.

It just seems arbitrary to me. Split the groups of people into "good results" and "bad results" and then treating everyone in both groups the same seems so reductive as to not just be useless but convince me there's some kind of background reason for doing so.

I downscale all of the videos I download to 480p to save space. I also convert my FLACs to MP3. Suck it!

I don't have a degree. I'd love a cleaning job I can actually live on. The last one I had worked the shit out of me and paid peanuts. See: the problem.

"Non-Asian minority" is really really weird to me. We're just... making that distinction for some reason. Like what they don't count?

Hell, I think you need basic algebra for basic abstract algebra! And you're not convincing me you know anything about upper-level math if you don't know basic like... group theory.

There are open source trackers like Famitracker, and there are kinda-sorta-half-decent open source DAWs now like Ardour and LMMS.

So websites move to the Spotify model of getting paid... that's gonna suck.

I gotta say, I feel pretty happy having been an active artist prior to the 2020s. I feel like I have a certificate of authenticity on my back.

> It's not that people "are less willing to believe there is stuff they don't understand", it's "people are fed up of being marketed to by centuries of con-people trying to spin the idea that they understand something deep and insightful that we don't, and we need to turn to them for help with it".

Everything you said was baked into my post already, so it's funny to me that your conclusion ends up being the exact phenomenon I was talking about. I don't feel like going point by point but nothing you said was something I haven't considered.

Yes! Sometimes there are experts in higher-up places that do simply just understand something deep and insightful that you don't, and they may not have a peer-reviewed scientific study justifying this. You are allowed to not accept this - it may even be true, although I don't think so - but how are you going to keep thinking about what you might not know yet if you're already convinced you know about as much as the author does?

Like... are you going to keep thinking about the ideals in Star Trek if you think you know more than Gene Roddenbury? Are you going to keep thinking about what Lord of the Rings means if you're absolutely certain no author could really be THAT insightful? I've already come to a conclusion here: no.

I would want to make sure we avoid "We should always do the exact specific thing that would have prevented this exact specific issue"-style thinking.

I think someone who knows those dishes like the back of their hand would make significantly better sushi than me. On the other hand, I'm willing to bet that someone who just makes burgers probably can make sushi about as well as I could.

The way I see it is, AI cannot nail these things until you can imbue it with a comprehensive set of human experiences, knowledge and opinions, and the knowledge of every step of the artistic creation process, AND how to weave these two different things together to create something that conveys inherent meaning to other humans by virtue of being the thing that it is.

Basically until we can actually model a human brain in real time, AI generated media will always be kinda shit. Not exceptionalism - just the truth.

I think people today, in general, would be unwilling to hold the idea in their heads that a movie might be good in a way that goes over their heads, or that they just don't understand. There's no curiosity that it might be more than what they saw it to be. And when everyone sees art as beneath them (or at least, certainly not above them), it loses that transcendent quality.

It's like... someone gives you a gift, and then you ask "Wow! Can I have arbitrarily more of these, please?" It's a lack of appreciation for what we have - instead of enjoying it, you want to press a button to create arbitrarily more of it. That is truly no appreciation at all.

If it's a person who wants to personally make my experience better, sure, yay.

If it's a manager who wants to use AI to maximize my engagement, fuck that.