I have a 5 year old android phone that I’m super happy with (still fast, OLED screen, cameras on par with current phones, 2 day battery life etc.). Apart from the fact that google has started to kill it. E.g they won’t allow banking apps to be installed, because it’s android 11. So One+ was one of the brands on the shortlist for my next phone. Guess they’re off now.

Yep. J2C has struck DDR5.

I’m not talking about a precise definition of consciousness, I’m talking about a consistent one.

Does not matter, any which way you try to spin it, any imprecise or “inconsistent” definition anybody would want to use, literally EVERYBODY with half a brain will agree that humans DO have consciousness and a rock does not. A squid could be arguable. But LLMs are just a mm above rocks, and lightyears below squids on the ladder towards consciousness.

The problem is that I have more than a basic understanding of how an LLM works. I’ve written NNs from scratch and I know that we model perceptrons after neurons.

Yea. The same way Bburago models real cars. They look somewhat similar, if you close one eye and squint the other and don’t know how far each of them are. But apart from looks, they have NOTHING in common and in NO way offer the same functionality. We don’t even know how many different types of neurons are, let alone be close to replicating each of their functions and operations:

https://alleninstitute.org/news/why-is-the-human-brain-so-difficult-to-understand-we-asked-4-neuroscientists/

So no, AI/LLMs are absolutely and categorically nowhere near where we could be lamenting about whether they would be conscious or not. Anyone questioning this is a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect, by having zero clue about how complex brains and neurons are, and how basic, simple and function-lacking current NN technology is in comparison.

Your logic is critically flawed. By your logic you could argue that there is no “logical way to argue a human has consciousness”, because we don’t have a precise enough definition of consciousness. What you wrote is just “I’m 14 and this is deep” territory, not real logic.

In reality, you CAN very easily decide whether AI is conscious or not, even if the exact limit of what you would call “consciousness” can be debated. You wanna know why? Because if you have a basic undersanding of how AI/LLM works, than you know, that in every possible, concievable aspect in regards with consciusness it is basically between your home PC and a plankton. None of which would anybody call conscious, by any definition. Therefore, no matter what vague definition you’d use, current AI/LLM defintiely does NOT have it. Not by a longshot. Maybe in a few decades it could get there. But current models are basically over-hyped thermostat control electronics.

There is no right shade of brown to them.

The sad thing is, we’ve already had this figured out before.

15-20 years ago Google was almost perfect. It completely blew my mind how accurate and fast it was. Many times it felt like it was a mind-reader. I didn’t even type in half my question and it was already auto-completing it and showing the results, the first few of which contained a very exact and detailed answer that someone wrote on a forum somewhere or an article that gave me a complete and correct answer. Remember the old ‘I’m feeling lucky’ button which directly took you to the first search result? Yea, it was pretty usable back then, because the first result was usually correct. Pepperidge farm 'members…

And then the enshittification started by pumping the site full of ads. First the ads were pretty distinguishable from the real results and you could just scroll through them. Then they started to disguise the ads more and more like real results, and just showing more of them. And by now I think google is basically ONLY ads. There are NO real results on it. Virtually the only ‘content’ you are shown are what somebody has payed for google to show. Even if what you are looking for is a very well known, public interest fact, if nobody is paying for it, google is not going to show it. E.g. the other day google could not find me the website of a country-wide utility company for electricity by typing their exact name, because I guess they haven’t paid their monthly ads for google.

Luckily there are other alternatives to google, which still have ‘don’t do evil’ in their corporate philosophy. None of them are close to as good as google used to be, especially if you are not searching in english. But still a hell of a lot better than how google is now.

Have you ever mistakenly payed for having sex with an underage girl? No? Me neither. Nor did literally anyone I know. See how easy it is to avoid?

That’s why I’ve put her only on second place from the top. It’s a nice thing that she’s flipped a seat, but it’s not gonna start a reform of the party. The reform is gonna come from Mamdani’s win and Pelosi’s retirement.

Yeah, I agree, that is also very important. But I still think that getting rid of Pelosi and the other ghouls in the DNC would/could be the most important thing right now. The Democratic Party desperately needs a renewal, a progressive reform and to embrace real left-wing, socialist politics to save the middle class from sliding down and help poor people to break out - as opposed to give in to every wish and whim of billionaire oligarchs who are stealing literally all wealth from the rest of society.

The whole ‘let’s follow the republicans further and further to the right to grab the centrist’s votes’ idea clearly is not working. It is not making peoples’ lives better (except for the oligarchs). And it is not even helping democrats win elections and secure power any more.

Appeasement didn’t work against the nazis, why would it work against MAGA?

But unfortunately Pelosi, Schumer, Jeffries and the rest of these cronies are all absolutely hellbent on keeping up with the appeasement. They all need to retire or get primaried, or the US is lost to fascism for who knows how many decades.

Glad I could help

Land of the free, ladies and gentleman.

Yeah, he was joking. But JFC, what a self important, egotistical prick! He manages to brag about him being the VP twice in under 30 seconds.

Then why are you writing like one?

When the state executes a convicted murderer, it is not terrorism. If someone murders their spouse out of jealousy, it’s not terrorism. When a serial killer murders 10 people, it is still not usually terrorism.

But when a radical minority group wants to push their political/religious agenda and subdue, oppress the general population by randomly murdering a bunch of them - that IS terrorism.

All of the above are murders, but not all of them are terrorism.

The same is true for every other type of aggression, including doxing. They can be used for many things in many cases. They can be used as a means of oppression, or the oppressed can use them to fight back against oppression. Almost all forms of aggression can be used for the good of society (e.g. by the police against criminals, or by the revolutionists against their oppressors) and of course for bad reasons as well. It all depends on the situation.

So no, doxing does NOT equal terrorism. But it can be used as such.

Unfortunately I’m afraid this will only be a very short term gain for society. In the longer term CEO-s will just muscle-up. They’ll hire a whole bunch more security and bodyguards, armored vehicles, taller, concrete fences around their properties and show their faces even less in public. All on company expense, so from our, their consumers’ money of course. They will become even more isolated, secluded and cut off from society, more paranoid and resentful about the rest of us, mere ‘plebs’.

I’m not saying I don’t understand why people are celebrating. But I don’t think that this murder will help steer back society, inequality and corporate greed into a healthier, better direction. Instead it is just another step along the path to the dystopian future shown in so-so many sci-fi literature and movies. Where 99% of society has been delegated to a complete slave-like status, with ZERO financial security, self-determination, healthcare access and freedom while they spend day and night labouring endlessly, just to not starve or freeze to death. Which they still might, if they get in an accident or an illness which bankrupts them.

Meanwhile the 1% will reap ALL the benefits from the work of all the rest of us and they’ll live like no king has ever lived before. Possibly their lifes extended to hundreds of years, flying around the planet between their mansions from party to party.

Murdering one or two CEO-s will not prevent this future I think. We will need a much, much wider show of rejection of this future if we want to stop it. We will need protests, demonstrations and show of unity. The rich will try to prevent this in every possible way. They will call the protesters terrorists, fundamentalists. Police will treat them as criminals and jail or even kill many of them. But if the society-wide rejection of this dystopian future is not shown in full force, it WILL HAPPEN.

I don’t know which TV have you been watching, but you seriously have zero fucking clue about who Kamala Harris is. She specifically just vowed to do everything to reach piece in Gaza: https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/us-election-2024-donald-trump-rhetoric-darkens-kamala-harris-vows-gaza-peace-in-final-hours-6938437

It’s enough to whatch a few interviews with both Trump and Kamala to know about their character and where their heart is. None of them are particularly good liars, actually their both pretty bad at it. The difference is: Trump voters don’t care at all how many lies he’s telling them, so he does it constantly. Kamala’s voters immediately start turning away from her when she’s caught/seems to be lying, so she can’t really afford to do it. It’s the classic double standard between D and R candidates on all levels.^___

She most certainly isn’t OK with it. She said she wants to end the war and have peace several times. She is not a sociopath, unlike Trump, so if she had the means, she would gladly stop supporting Israel with guns. Unfortunately, she does not - at the moment. Why does she not?

Because Israel and Bibi is supporting both Democrats and Republicans in the US elections, and has been for decades (although Bibi naturally leans towards Trump recently, as a fellow autocrat and dictator-wannabe). But Israel is actually lobbying for both sides and partially financing them, as well as having a lot of media under their control that can campaign for or attack any or both of them. They arguably can influence 1-2-3% of voters to swing one way or the other. And that is enough to keep both D and R parties/candidates on their sides, as the gap between the two parties are so small, that those few percents could easily decide the election.

So what would be a solution? If both D and R are dependent on Israel to win elections, what could be done? Well, if one side would win by a huge margin, bigger than those few percents, than they would no longer need the political support from Israel. Of, course, if this was Trump, he would still support them, because he likes other dictators and wannabe dictators, like Bibi, Putin, Orbán or Kim. They all help each other out against democratic countries.

But if Kamala would have a commanding win, that would actually enable her to not care about Israel’s political support anymore and do the right thing: end military support for Israel and thus stop the genocide. Let’s hope that she will have this power.

The usual way to fix these things is civil war. Don’t worry, you won’t have to start it, the racists and fascists will do it for you. And then they’ll get annihilated, like always.

This is because they may be loud, aggressive, greedy, hateful and boastful which all help them start and ramp up wars. But they are also stupid, cowardly, irrational, week minded and a minority, which make them loose these wars.

Both, of course.