Comments by "miraculixx" (@miraculixxs) on "Lex Clips" channel.

  1. Musk's Problem Solving Algorithm is 1. Make requirements less dumb, i.e, reduce to the "one" purpose 2. Delete everything in the system that is not absolutely needed 3. Re-add what is still needed. If you don't have anything to re-add you did not delete enough. 4. Speed it up, make more efficient 5. Automate Often smart engineers start by automating. There is no point in automating something that should not be there. Start by deleting.
    352
  2. Viruses are effectively code. By definition code cannot be intelligent. However code can cause emergent behavior that looks intelligent. I think that's what Lex means.
    69
  3. Good he mentioned the fact that even the gaming models have a human imposed objective function. In other words these models, like all the others, are just mathematical optimizers, and all the ingenuity and intelligence it takes to build them is entirely human. It's literally machine(d) learning, no artificial intelligence whatsoever.
    41
  4. "It's like being surounded by VR porn", Lex: "ohgotitcool" 🤷‍♂️
    38
  5. "I have heard about Ex Machina but I have never seen it", says the guy who wants to invent AGI 🤯
    23
  6. There is some truth to that I guess. Though probably the real reason is some misguided idea along the lines of "real programmers don't use debuggers" which of course is stupid.
    19
  7. I really don't get what people are obsessing about with JavaScript. It's a great language and it gets stuff done.
    18
  8. It's just not true that alphazero et al were not programmed to the rules of the games they play. Read the papers AI/machine learning is not magic. It's clever use of math and computational power. That's all. The intelligence is entirely human.
    17
  9. Dude you alright?
    13
  10. I can totally see why people give him billions. I wouldn't though.
    13
  11. He thinks too statically about models - these are software models, not hardware. What gets sent to cars are a combination of software + data (eg weights + hyper params) and then loaded unto the car's hardware. It is not necessarily the very same model for each car, eg models could be seggregated by geography, region, city. I don't have specific insight, just noting that's possible.
    13
  12. I am not convinced that computer science is going to go away. But I am sure it needs to be redesigned and get it of its brain-dead approach to learning sorting algorithms. What people still need is ability to think, structure, manage complexity, etc. The idea that everyone will be able to think computationally is nice but hardly realistic.
    8
  13.  @matthewvandermeer4934  it took decades of research to get the plate tectonics theory sort of evidence-based accepted. I doubt we know nearly enough about all the other planets and their moons to reach this conclusion.
    8
  14. Funny how Lex has gone full circle from having a pod cast to teach students to interviewing students.
    8
  15. "intelligent" is not a good way to describe a math formula. AI models are just that - math formulae. The intelligence in them, if any, is entirely human, namenly by the developers. All else is just marketing, and not very good one at that.
    8
  16. "Earth is unique in that it has plate tectonics" I'm not sure that's gonna age well.
    7
  17. Lex, thinking that all it takes to end the war is for Zelensky to agree to negotiate is naive on first and second order thinking. Get your facts straight.
    7
  18. Sam is such a pleasant person to listen to, I could go on all day. 😮
    7
  19. Scala? Hm. Who uses it? And I don't mean the great folks who created and maintain the language and its ecosystem.
    6
  20. What I enjoy most is young people telling us we absolutely must go vegan bc reasons and then proud themselves of wearing the newest sh* they ordered on Etsy or something and had it delivered over night straight from some Southeast Asian sweatshop. 😂
    6
  21.  @Ian-eb2io  "no way" is impossible
    6
  22. Why would something smarter than us kill humanity? That doesn't sound intelligent, it sounds recklessly dumb. I'm not afraid of AI, but I am concerned of the stupidity of human operators.
    6
  23. "Formal verification" for everything really gave it away. Tell me you are clueless without telling me.
    5
  24.  @helgeh  they do important(tm) work 😉
    5
  25. Mainframes are not slow!
    5
  26.  @HeavyDist  thanks for the feedback. I was not trying to prove anything.
    5
  27. In a nutshell: Language models were introduced some ~15 years ago, i.e. models that can generate text. While they generated text, these were not very good or useful. Several smart people tried different approaches (RNN, WaveNet, etc. finally Attention/Transformers), and ultimately found a model that works really good, but on a small data base. Google, OpenAI, and some others, were in somewhat like a research competition of getting better and better models, using more and more data. Then OpenAI was bold enough to use all the data they could get their hands on. And that gave us ChatGPT.
    5
  28. "What is the best movie?" - "The Godfather. Btw I just did a movie with the Godfather's creator. I met him. I was with him on set. I made this movie."
    4
  29. Intelligence goes far beyond text generation. Yes these models can simulate(!) human-like reasoning but it does not actually think.
    4
  30. ​ @raphaelamorim same. Also programmed soc with 64kb to do pattern detection just using plain c code.
    4
  31. Chomsky would accuse the US of expanding its might and causing downfall of the world, Wolfram would say there is perhaps a fundamental law that makes the language of Chomsky sound the way it does. 😅
    4
  32. What?
    4
  33. Thanks for that! Observing the same. Also driving a car does not take that much consciousness once you get past the learning phase. In other words self driving cars are not a sensible example of AGI-in the making. Rather it is a sophisticated machine with a very specific purpose, making many routine observations and taking conclusions to act. Impressive, yes, not intelligent and certainly not concsious.
    4
  34. He doesn't come across like very thoughtful or otherwise qualified to deal with society-wide technology.
    4
  35. If somebody tells me about blockchain this and that I replace "blockchain" with "database". It usually is just BS after that. Same thing with NFT. Replace NFT with "payment". Keep it sane.
    4
  36. Yes. Humans have been living in space for at least 300'000 years. Duh The more interesting question is, why did it take us 299'950 years to build a capability to visit other stellar bodies? Or did it?
    4
  37. Combine many important sounding words and you'll have yourself a talk with Lex 😮
    4
  38. With all due respect I don't think this guy knows much about the technical details of GPT and other AI models. There is literally nothing in these models that could even potentially develop a deceptive conscioussnes, nor any other kind of conscioussnes. It's just maths.
    3
  39. Perhaps we need just one additional law: "Any AI system, for all intent and purpose, is treated as and subject to the very same rules, laws and societal pressures as human beings."
    3
  40. It's the Dolphins they are interested in. Obvious!
    3
  41.  @shark23-17  come again?
    3
  42. We need a minimum age for pod cast participants.
    3
  43. I don't see how these youngsters can appreciate the complexities of real world IT systems. Naturally they can't. They use terms like "engineering department" but in reality they don't really understand neither of these two words. Engineering in the real world is exactly not about code, but about humans collaborating to make a systems work. The way they talk about this is very revealing, but also very common for young folks.
    3
  44. Doesn't seem to like Intel that much :)
    3
  45.  @Pat315  actually you do. If you don't, why a program works or rather why it does not will stay hazy forever
    3
  46. If he thinks he can get Putin to back down why does he not get on the phone and call the guy?
    3
  47. Yeah except in Germany, if the recent pandemic is any guide. They would immediately have about 30% of the population arguing that the missiles are not real, and even if they were that "getting hit by one is good for your immune system" as well as "dying is something we have to live with" 😢
    3
  48. There are also very few systems that need that scalability, duh
    3
  49. Vscode sucks compared to PyCharm. It keeps amazing me how people jump to the most recent coolaid instead of using the tool they like
    3
  50. The first technology was likely not fire, but sticks or stone. Mastery of fire as a tool came much later. She says stuff very beautifully and with authority but that doesn't make it right. 😮
    3
  51. Yes, but how is it defined and measured?
    3
  52. Except the only thing that's "public" is the user interface. OpenAI should be more aptly called ClosedAI.
    2
  53. It's mind boggling
    2
  54. The fun thing is we now have a new hype with ChatGPT. People are just easily excited with shiny objects. The funny thing is that people are jumping on GPT for generating text like mad. But generating text is really a very small subset of the use of AI in businesses.
    2
  55. OMG 😮
    2
  56. The real challenge is not some sort of group who controls everything. The real challenge are the vast number of people who have made up their minds that such a group exists against all logical reason and evidence. See comments below.
    2
  57. And wrong - the cruft has since built to whole layers of sticky ugly molds.
    2
  58. Well that's a naive way of looking at politicians' motivation. Some may start out that way and even hold on to this idea of altruistic policy making on behalf of their voters. Reality speaks a different language, and it talks money.
    2
  59. On replication, fascinating thoughts. The interesting thing is that we are not generally aware of the layers upon layers of things that must fall in place for nature to create. And it's a miracle that it works so flawlessly almost everytime.
    2
  60. I think Lex sincerely disregards the role of aerosols and mutants in the danger of corona virus. He should require himself and his guests to wear masks when interviewing people inside for hours on end. Or rather he should do it online or outside.
    2
  61. You can't just calculate some stuff and call that "proof", absent of any actual evidence.
    2
  62. Have these guys ever spoken to a business person? No way they will ever build a technical system, not in English not in anything else.
    2
  63. He doesn't know
    2
  64. "Do humans have an impact on climate change?" - Probably yes. "Is the climate primarily influenced by human burning of fossile fuel?" - Probably no. It hasn't for the last 13000 years, yet it has been warming and there has been significant sea level rise. Sure there is more of both now as far as we can tell, though the numbers (net CO2 volume by humans) make it unlikely that humans are the major (key) driver of change.
    2
  65. Lex. Nobody can be their best version of themsleves all the time.
    2
  66. It's just formulae. Maths + data. Nothing else. If you think GPT is conscious then by the same argument, any machine must be too.
    2
  67.  @scottlong1552  why these days disagreement is often expressed using a personal slur? So totally unnecessary.
    2
  68. Why would he do that?
    2
  69. Same here. And for the same reason I work as a single consultant only, or in a team of single consultants.
    2
  70. Even if everyone had different passwords everywhere, we still need 2FA. Reason being simple passwords are just not safe.
    2
  71. He is totally on point about debuggers. It boggles my mind that so few people know how to use a debugger efficiently. Also tests. Write more tests people.
    2
  72. This! 👆 thank you
    2
  73.  @n4rzul  these models only work by using what is there already. The human mind is capable of conceiving completely new ideas that have no basis whatsoever in reality. These models can't. Also the human mind is capable of logic and mathematical thinking. These models cannot do that. All they do is predict the most likely next word that appears probably right, given all the input the model has previously seen.
    2
  74. "Open mind" means to accept facts despite belief. It does not mean to accept beliefs in absence of facts, which is what UFO fans seem to think.
    2
  75. Perhaps some power used bioengineering on us to make us from Neanderthals?
    1
  76.  @daanisch  we KNOW how these models work. There is nothing in these models that takes decisions other than mapping floating point values to words.
    1
  77. I'm sure there are applications for this, but meetings are not one of them, unless its become much less intrusive and more emersive. For example the goggles must go away and be integrated in bog standard glasses, or lenses, or implants.
    1
  78. It has always been difficult. Meet them in RL and be nice.
    1
  79. Humans are probably the robotic ("artificial") life form created by some ancient civizilation that came to earth to exploit it, and humans were dedicated to doing the grunt work. Why they have, if they did, we might never know.
    1
  80. Unit tests?
    1
  81. Lex has a new studio / background? Nice
    1
  82. The government doesn't spend money unless the congress has authorized the spending.
    1
  83. "We are always in ketchup mode" - that pretty much sums it up (pun intended).
    1
  84. GPT does not understand anything. Like nothing, nada, zero, silch. All it does is generate one word after another subject to the probability distribution of word sequences it knows from training, conditioned on a users prompt. That's it. Just math.
    1
  85. The West will not be blackmailed by a perceived lack of energy.
    1
  86. I think his definition of intelligence lacks a crucial aspect, namely self motivation. AI technology does not have any self motivation, they are tools at our command. Very different. With his definition dish washers would be intelligent: it solves a problem (lack of time) and attains a goal (have clean dishes).
    1
  87. All ML models, including GPT-n are machines. There is no conciousness. For starters there is no self. Also next token prediction is not intelligence. It's just statistics. Personally I fear not the machines but the people who think they are entitled to rule the world.
    1
  88. My ability to compartmentalize ChatGPT the service from OpenAI the company and his CEO is amazing.
    1
  89.  @gregd6022  lol. Did my fair share of assembly too
    1
  90. You can't teach an LLM to say "I don't know". LLMs don't know anything so they can't know when they don't. LLMs are just huge math formulae.
    1
  91. No it's not
    1
  92. Better as in ?
    1
  93. It is still no question that being vaccinated against COVID is better than not to be. The science is clearly in favor of being vaccinated, regardless of perceived personal risk. The truth is that nobody knows who is vulnerable. Regardless, don't get infected is still the best protection against all risk.
    1
  94.  @cotch40  the same as you do, except I know the science and you choose to ignore it
    1
  95. Governments haven't even tried to stop bitcoin. Wait till they do, it will go to zero in literally minutes. The annoncement will go something like this: "Central banks have outlawed all crypotcurrency as of <date>. Anyone trading in crypto will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law". Once that happened, FOLE will kick in (fear of losing everything), price will dwindle to zero. Peter Thiel is a private investor. He does not attain government power. His arguments are very much like what lead to the first internet boom bubble. It didn't end well. IMHO this guy is just too young to appreciate what's relevant and what's not. Bitcoin is not. Sorry to spoil the party.
    1
  96. That is funny, but also literally not true.
    1
  97. Computer Networking was invented in the 1960ies, if not earlier
    1
  98.  @gandrew97  indeed, but it was in the same 1950/60 timeframe
    1
  99. Lex you realize that we are trading performance for precision again right?
    1
  100. Soon we'll see Lex run his first interview in his sleep 🤯 Lex be sure to rest sometimes. We need u
    1
  101. I get it alright. So what to we do?
    1
  102. Change the contents of these sentences to something unlikely.
    1
  103. The intelligent question to ask is "Lex, what is AGI in your thinking and why do we need that"? The even more intelligent question is "what are the world's key problems and how can we solve them?" Hint: AGI is not the answer.
    1
  104. That's BS
    1
  105. No, Lex. Labelling code is a not a good practice. Like not at all, literally bad kind of not good.
    1
  106. In absence of certainty excercise caution. Simple as that. Wear a mask! There is ample scientific evidence that masks provide the best protection, short of not getting in social contact at all. The problem is not lack of scientific study, there is a lack of acceptance of facts.
    1
  107. So we all have to wear AR goggles to appear 'natural' in VR space. I don't think so.
    1
  108. Actually the opposite. There is too much group think going on.
    1
  109. The biggest limitation of humanity is the belief that everything in the universe is subject to mathematics. 😂
    1
  110. Some animals are concious. Apes, dogs, cats come to mind.
    1
  111. The key things to learn are memory, instructions and pointers. Unfortunately hardly anyone starts there anymore.
    1
  112. Peer review is overrated. Things that matter happen in preprints.
    1
  113. If you want to do search, well, just do search. Seems that Perplexity is search with an AI label
    1
  114. There will be a new programming paradigm, but it won't be English
    1
  115.  @WilliamParkerer  the value in watching ex machina is in reflecting about the story, not in the story itself. Mr Altman does not strike me as someone who reflects a lot.
    1
  116. Vscode is totally inferior to intellij though
    1
  117. @1cx7r23  hey Sam nice meeting you here. You made my point - not qualified.
    1
  118.  @1cx7r23  that's your first fallacy. AI is not a society wide technology. Besides, nobody wants you (Sam) near that kind of decision making.
    1
  119. The German Green Party wants us to go back to 0.0
    1
  120. One way functions are not complex. Their reconstruction is.
    1
  121. So if reality is a simulation why do I have to shave each day?
    1
  122. Calm down everyone. Today I couldn't even loan a book from my local library because it is not available online.
    1
  123.  @lucagain.  consider an Email system. Main purpose: Send and Receive Email. Start with that. Most people start with the UI, which causes to obscure the main purpose.
    1
  124. People's health is affected by catching this virus far more than any of the measures taken. COVID is the leading cause by now.
    1
  125. In fact the models war exactly on point. Look at the numbers.
    1
  126. Ever seen the aftermath of an earthquake or a flood? Vastly more devestating than any city. Just saying
    1
  127. All he's saying is it's not the government overspending but congress. Go figure
    1
  128. It's not true that there was no face to face communication between the West and Russia. Quite to the contrary. There was a continuous and constant flow of initiatives, talks, partnerships, investment and most of all exchange of culture by expats on both sides. For almost 30 years. It was working well until Putin decided to attack Ukraine in 2014 for no reason at all.
    1
  129. Statistics is a bad advisor for things you know nothing or very little about. In fact, we call it guessing.
    1
  130. 10'000 hours on a fulltime, 8 hours/day, 5 days/week is approx. ~6 years. Fyi
    1
  131. It's not the risk of dying that motivates protection. It's the risk of falling ill, possibly for life.
    1
  132.  @oSwhs  kids not only have the right to the same protection as adults but we are ethically if not legally bound to afford them the best protection available to avoid any harm, even if only as a precaution. Risking infection with a virus whose long term effects are unknown yet potentially harmful is the opposite of precaution. I don't see how this can be framed as desperate.
    1
  133.  @oSwhs  not sure where in the world you live, I don't know any nation other than China who has actually forced lock downs on anyone. Limitations of contact yes (it's a dangerous virus, after all) and meaures of protection like social distancing & masks. Kids don't have a problem with these measures, but they do have a problem with their close relatives dying of a preventable desease and with life-long disabilities caused by neglience. Re the side effects of vax in children, the effects of the disease are far more frequent than the former, ie vax risk is much lower than risk of becoming seriously ill from infection (both in children and in adults). Long term effects of vax are generally unknown - besides very unlikely in the way that the vax work, i.e. helping the immune system to learn to fight a new virus without actually causing the illness. If you fear the long term effects of the vax (in adults & children) it would be wise to fear the long term effect of the actual virus more.
    1
  134. Gotta love how everyone is now flocking to peddle their wares around ChatGPT. Actually I find it disgusting.
    1
  135.  @scientist30  No, it is not. I see your argument in that chemical reactions are the mechanics of how biology works, similar to maths being the mechanics of current AI. Yet chemistry alone is not sufficient to make us alive. In contrast to AI and in particular LLMs, where even a subset of the same math + data is sufficient to replicate similar phaenomena. So the mechanics of it are not enough.
    1
  136. I have essentiay stopped reading and responding to email. Period
    1
  137.  @nygeek6471  so you disagree. What is a virus, if not code?
    1
  138.  @nygeek6471  neither did I even say it was novel. You are reading too much into my statement. It says what it says. That's it.
    1
  139.  むく  interesting question. I think atoms are different from code in that they are what make up the material the code (as in DNA) written on/in.
    1
  140.  @matthewpeterson5159  code is just that. It doesn't do anything. It needs some device, machinery to be executed. Code is like text in a book. If code could be intelligent libraries would run the world :)
    1
  141. So funny to see all these overblown "promises" dismantled by reality.
    1
  142. Science: you don't understand this, lowlifes. Hush hush Alson science: people don't understand science.
    1
  143. Chomsky's analysis is way off. It's not the US that is causing issues.
    1
  144. I'm not sure what Lex thinks ChatGPT does but it is not some super intelligent can do anything machine. It's essentially the equivalent of a calculator but for language. No new insight possible.
    1
  145. When 'common' people wonder it's called speculation. When 'scientists' speculate it's called scientific study. Stop the arrogance (looking at her).
    1
  146. And u know better ofc
    1
  147.  @anthonybeaton9823  you have to read between the lines. Always 😉
    1
  148. All things considered and thought about, taking every argument into account and throwing like 100 times more compute power at it, figuring out all the scientific challenges along the way, could it be he doesn't know what he is talking about? Probaaably
    1
  149. Also single lines of code are never dangerous as such.
    1
  150. What a BS question.
    1
  151. What other movies does she know?
    1
  152. Gen Z is lit. In my time, at this age, we sure thought we know it all, but we kept quiet, and it was for good reason.
    1
  153.  @shaneacton1627  no offense intended, but the description of LLMs as having "emergent" intelligence is the modern-day equivalent of the medieval-time alchemists claiming to turn metal into gold. Emergence simply means that a system exhibits characteristics that none of its constituent parts has by itself. That's true of any engineered system, like any car, any airplane, any smartphone, literally anything that is built from multiple parts. The one thing "emergent" does not describe, nor imply is intelligence. To say "emergent intelligence" doesn't help.
    1
  154.  @shaneacton1627  I am amazed as anyone by the capabilities of these models. However, I don't think we can say "AI" has made progress; it is not a thing that progresses. What has happened is that a small number of humans have made huge advances in using computers and maths to build systems that exhibit characteristics which can be said to simulate human behavior. That's what they have been built for. Simulating human behavior, and in particular, linguistic behavior, is the entire purpose of these systems (as far as LLMs are concerned). The engineers who built these systems, as well as the scientific and software engineering communities at large, understand every single bit from which these systems are built and how these systems work. Ah yes, I am familiar with the claim that "even those who built GPT don't understand how they work": that is just PR nonsense, designed to make people think there is more to it than what it actually is. Sure, if you enter a prompt and it produces a response, no one can say, specifically and without further investigation, why this particular response was generated, at this time. But that doesn't mean they don't know, in general, how and why it works. That's akin to travelling by plane and then asking the engineer sitting next to you "so tell me, at what altitude we are flying, at which speed, right now, and why are we at this precise coordinates at this very time?" Sure, they will be able to give you a general answer, but not the specifics. As with any engineered system, we can establish how they work in general quite easily, however, we can't know for sure for a specific instance of their operation without thorough investigation. If we really want to know, we have to conduct very specific experiments and even create simulations so that we can study the minute details. Same thing with AI. It's just that LLMs are far more complex than most engineered systems, as they have billions of parameters and all of them have been set by an elaborate process called training (a term that is probably confusing as it sort of implies these models can learn in a human sense, which they can't) . Yet we do understand the process, and why and how these parameters have been adjusted -- it's all maths. Specifically speaking, it's a process called back propagation, which in maths terms is partial derivatives applied backwards subject to an objective function that measures the desired outcome. This process is applied repeatedly until most of the inputs produce the desired output. Most importantly, a model does not learn by itself, it is a process designed, started, overseen and executed by humans, obviously by using computers. In a nutshell, humans are in charge every step of the way. AI does not even make any decisions on its own, it just executes instructions. Always. Note how that's very different from biological evolution and biological systems and entities, which develop, work and evolve by themselves, no humans required. Sure we (as in those few humans who have the skills and aptitude for that) can manipulate and modify organisms through various means, however, we still don't fully understand how they work, nor are we able to make new organisms as to meet some specific goal (yet - hopefully for much longer). It blows my mind that anyone could think AI is somehow intelligent. It's maths, all the way down.
    1
  155.  @shaneacton1627  just know that I responded to your comment. It was removed.
    1
  156.  @shaneacton1627  don't know.
    1
  157. Thank you Lex. I wish you had stopped at 2.52, the end of your statement on the war. The other part should be its own clip.
    1
  158. This guys don't know the first thing about finding bugs. Obviously.
    1
  159.  @isodoubIet  these frameworks are made to make people more productive, not to overcome flaws of JS. They exist for every language.
    1
  160.  @isodoubIet  tell me you have never developed software without telling me you have never developed software
    1
  161. AGI has always been 5 years away, tops. Since 1950
    1
  162.  @venture3800  sure. But why did nobody figure it out for so long? All the material has been there even back then. The curious thing is most of the discoveries enabling modern life happened within the span of the past ~300 years. Why not sooner?
    1
  163. Interesting point of view. Let's hope he will never become of power. Dark times might ensue.
    1
  164. I know a few Gen Z (Europe) and they are about split equally between pro/con cancel culture. With all of them they don't like people who disagree with them and they also strongly believe they are the first generation ever to face life problems.
    1
  165. If we live in a simulation there may not actually be a universe in the way we think there is. It may all just be a forgotten lab stashed away somewhere dark, created by some nerd physics student called Lex. duh In fact that seems more probable than anything else. Think about the weirdness of the asteroid belt for example, that seems very deliberately put there to stop further inquiry (badly implemented, thus leaky).
    1
  166. Of course it is already being done. And why not? The mistake is not that of connecting an LLM to the internet but that of not monitoring and controlling what it does.
    1
  167.  @WildcatWarrior15  I agree, however it won't work these people think
    1
  168.  @mambaASI  perhaps, probably not. This has been the promise since 1965
    1
  169.  @mambaASI  I am well aware of the context lol. I also know how these systems work, and they are not in any way shape or form intelligent. Just maths
    1
  170.  @joshbreidinger2616  indeed very similar. Glad we seem to agree. P.S. not sure what you are aluding to, but my words are mine.
    1
  171.  @joshbreidinger2616  whoops no that's not what I meant. To the contrary - there is no intelligence in these AI models. They are just pure mathematical formulae. That's it.
    1
  172.  @joshbreidinger2616  I wrote two comments in response but know that the YT AI has decided to prune them. So there's that.
    1
  173.  @Novascrub  great point! That also nicely resolves the human-brains-are-just-machines argument (if human brains were machines of the same principle making as these AI models, humans wouldn't be able to come up with these models in the first place) @josh breidinger
    1
  174. So true. Most stupid idea ever
    1
  175. Seems to me we should create AI that is less greedy than us, rather than more intelligent.
    1
  176. Yeah that doesn't compute though.
    1
  177. Yeah but the quick option is still a mess. You dont know what you are accepting
    1
  178.  @elenabob4953  evolved. Lol. It used to be accept or deny. Now it is usually a whole page to read and somewhere it says quick or minimal. It's all very annoying and completely useless.
    1
  179. In case you missed it, /s
    1
  180.  @griffith500tvr  perhaps you could start by writing properly? Besides using incomprehensible language is not a hallmark of intellectual ability, quite the contrary, actually. As is the assumption of someone's personal traits based purely on their stated criticism, even more so when the latter has been clearly sarcastic.
    1
  181.  @griffith500tvr  🤣 you are very funny indeed
    1
  182. I definitely could have chosen to not listen to him. No apparent cause.
    1
  183. And touch
    1