qarl2

> You still don't get it.

HEH. I just read your comment three times and I definitely don't get it. I think its entire point is to express outrage about not getting it, rather than actually explain it.

Really though? You have to try really hard to make your code that unstable - and well written code isn't that.

Seems more like voodoo.

You yourself would be non-deterministic if we could rewind time. So what's the issue here?

Not to mention, LLMs can be made deterministic if that were actually valuable.

Seems like determinism is just the latest excuse to hate.

The author's product (Realness) heavily promotes the fact that it works without the use of AI...

... but clearly AI was used in the development?

That seems deeply cynical.

I wonder why.

Sure. And that's what I mean by a practical solution.

But it seems suspect to accept a practical solution in one area (humans) and deny it in an almost identical (machines with neuron based brains) area. No?

YES - I agree entirely. But how are we going to escape solipsism?

These questions need a practical solution, not a perfect one. That's the problem. We need to stop chasing the perfect one.

This is the question of qualia - and it's surprisingly intractable. Realize that in this context, I can't be sure that you are conscious, either. Arguments here will crash into solipsism in the end: you guys can never prove you're not just one of my dreams.

I think that was the ultimate point of the Turing test. We can't know for certain - so the best we can do is just ask.

> There’s no third party test for a fundamentally first person phenomenon.

Agreed. But that also means I have no empirical evidence that YOU are conscious either.

Well - yes - I have. And the test came back positive.

But it's always possible I'm just being naive in some way. An external challenge makes it more robust.

I don't think I'd want to do an entire linux distro - it's needlessly large to test the hypothesis - but perhaps there's a part that you think would be an interesting challenge?

Come come, let's spec something real. You seem extremely doubtful, why don't you let me show you?

Oh, I believe agents are fully capable of it. Would you like to issue a challenge like that? I'd love to demonstrate their capabilities to you.

"That said, the recent shift feels more profound: almost every day, it feels that the lineup is dominated by stories focused on AI, written by AI, or commented on by AI."

I interpreted that as surprise. I apologize if you disagree.

The author of the article seems to be surprised.

As well as many people in these comments.

> "They lie about it being dangerous!" and simulataneously "They hacked a system with zero day exploits! Everyone involved should goto jail!"

FWIW:

The simultaneous "it's stupidly weak" and "it's dangerously strong" is a well known propaganda technique.

Surely you're aware of the various theories that AI is going to up-end the entire world.

How can you be surprised it's up-ending a geek forum first?

OH - I think I understand now. You're like LeCun - dismissive of LLMs in all their forms. So of course agents can't lead to AGI, because LLMs just can't.

Which I've always found so strange. Language was always considered the pinnacle of the human mind - right up until we created LLMs. Now it's the world model - the things that animals always had and the thing we used to look down on.

From my perspective, language is still at the top. I'm not a fickle lover of the gaps.

I remember when I caught PG on reddit arguing with some guy who'd said something mean about him. He didn't reveal who he was. But you could tell from his history - his first post was from before reddit opened to the public.

Good times.

I wonder if you can dig that out of the historical reddit database. I'd like to see that again. I love how everything is recorded now.

I never did Digg but I remember the issue there was the "power users".

Power corrupts, almost always. Most people are horrible when given power. The only thing holding them in-check is their powerlessness.

> it can't be both

Really? Do you have a proof of that?

Looking outside the realm of computer software, are you familiar with the concept of satire? "A Modest Proposal" is both funny and deadly serious at the same time. And it's been studied for hundreds of years.

So I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

That's fine. But the author's goal here is to determine if anyone can tell. So he's probably not going to ruin his experiment.

I believe this is to test the theory that people can detect watermarked text.

Teaching you how to identify watermarked text while the experiment is running would ruin the data.

HEH. It still doesn't make it right.

SO WEIRD.

My flagged comment has been unflagged, but the comment I made referring to the odd flagging is collapsed but not actually flagged either.

I think I must be in some kind of moderation hell.

EDIT: Oh - apparently someone at HN did it. But that's a shame, because there was good content in that thread. Why are you guys hiding it?

> potentially

My point is I don't understand how someone can get mad about something they're not even sure is happening.

Are you aware that the publishing industry itself has destroyed more than 500X as many books as Anthropic ever will?

Your concerns seem misguided.

But I suspect we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. You have a nice day.

You understand that what you just said is true of almost every company in the United States... right?

Sorry, but I'm going to save my efforts for the people who are ACTUALLY doing bad things - not just the people who I don't like who MIGHT be doing bad things.

Otherwise it kinda seems hysterical. IMHO.

UNDERSTOOD. WILL COMPLY.

don't let the crankles get you down. this thing is delightful.

did i say he was being unreasonable?

i asked him why he's pigeon-holing it. and you, too? don't hackers enjoy a little bit of playful ambiguity in their lives? must it be all serious all the time?

sheesh.

my last comment was flagged - presumably i didn't make it pedantic enough for someone, so let me try again:

why do you feel the need to pigeon-hole this work? the greatest things in life are more than one thing at once.

EDIT: stealth edits of your comments is naughty-naughty.