Rendered at 12:40:15 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
Nukahaha 3 hours ago [-]
"Unavailable Due to the UK Online Safety Act"
Isn't the "free" world a beautiful thing? -_____-'
YeGoblynQueenne 15 minutes ago [-]
Sounds more like a self-imposed penalty by the author. I mean I can read most of the world internet without such a message so I don't know what it even means.
estimator7292 6 minutes ago [-]
This is what the UK government wants. Kyle has spent an insane amount of effort to get answers from OFCOM, got none, and as such blocks the UK for self-preservation. The UK wants to fine non-citizens for violating online purity rules, so this is the result.
Blame the UK for this bullshit. The rules say you must geoblock the UK or be fined, and then sometimes you still get fined anyway.
Something that is still not clear to me is, what is conscious even. It references the Chinese Room experiment:
> Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so perfectly that no one can tell that they are communicating with a machine and not a hidden Chinese speaker.
But what makes a human mind more "understanding"? Who says we're not simulating? Who says our mind even exists, in this space?
We're also a neural network, are we any more clever than a simulated one?
projektfu 1 hours ago [-]
I think these questions were addressed by Searle[1]. His argument is not that AI is impossible, it's that the existence of surprisingly human-like behavior doesn't turn a non-cognitive system into a cognitive one. The strong AI hypothesis is that you can make a computational system where, if its output is similar to what a human would produce by cognition, the system must model cognition. The Chinese room is an argument against that hypothesis.
The paper also provides some suggestions as to where cog sci needs to go to make AI possible.
From my viewpoint, if you really think that LLMs can model cognition, then you are also going to have to bring along a model of human cognition to compare it to, and you have to do it "under the hood" as it were. The external behavior is not enough. In my formulation, if a space alien showed up with vastly different biology but appeared to be cognitively conscious, we may or may not want to believe in its cognitive ability, but it's just whattaboutism to use this hypothetical alien to argue for consciousness of the LLM.
> But what makes a human mind more "understanding"?
If you view understanding as knowledge + the ability to apply it, everything falls into its place. The Chinese room can't apply the knowledge that it has, even theoretically.
grebc 3 hours ago [-]
>But what makes a human mind more "understanding"? Who says we're not simulating? Who says our mind even exists, in this space?
The people running the experiment.
And yes is the answer to what should be a rhetorical question.
2ndorderthought 1 hours ago [-]
I see you have been downvoted. I also see how you can reason your way into your points of view. Let me see if I can add some points to consider.
1. Current ai models people use may be called neural networks, but they bare almost no real semblance to biological ones.
2. A complete human brain is not a compilation of all text books and internet chats. It is a nuanced technology shaped by human experiences , lived and biased by the chemistry of the human body. Human thought is not always linguistic. In the same way you do not tell your lungs to breathe every breath you can find a work of art astoundingly beautiful or a landscape to inspire you. Cleverness is one axis out of a billion to meter consciousness.
3. The human mind or consciousness stirs a lot of philosophical debate. Probably best not touched with a 10 ft poll on the Internet with strangers. I would encourage you to think about or read about human experiences, the synchronicities, and coincidences that happen between people. Especially under times of uncertainty, or blissful innovation. AI is seated backwards in the hierarchy of consciousness. That doesn't mean it's not useful but it's like comparing a water purification plant to the planets treatment of water from rain to subsurface flows and atmospheric chemistry.
Peace
throwanem 3 hours ago [-]
I say.
streetfighter64 3 hours ago [-]
[dead]
colinhb 4 hours ago [-]
Tangent - does anyone immediately recognise how this was typeset? I’m guessing it’s some kind of pandoc output?
I read the original chapters online but appreciate this format.
pdhborges 3 hours ago [-]
It's in the file metadata:
- LuaTeX-1.17.0
- LaTeX via pandoc
dwroberts 1 hours ago [-]
Can we stop putting this site on the front page if it has geoblocking for certain locations? Or at least require an archive link with it?
tardedmeme 1 hours ago [-]
Would we do the same for sites unavailable in North Korea? If your country is blocking sites, speak to your government about it.
te_chris 35 minutes ago [-]
the country isn't blocking his site. his self-importance is. OFCOM doesn't give a shit about this blog.
xantronix 3 minutes ago [-]
He does provide adult content on his site, to be perfectly fair.
estimator7292 3 minutes ago [-]
Blame your own government for trying to levy fines on non-citizens anywhere on the entire damn planet without explaining or justifying itself.
Kyle has spent a lot of time and resources trying to talk to OFCOM. They won't give answers, so the only reasonable option is to block the UK.
Which is the entire point of your laws. Blame yourself.
dfxm12 23 minutes ago [-]
Can't you put archive.is/ in front of the url to get your own archive link? Or is that geoblocked too?
Isn't the "free" world a beautiful thing? -_____-'
Blame the UK for this bullshit. The rules say you must geoblock the UK or be fined, and then sometimes you still get fined anyway.
> Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so perfectly that no one can tell that they are communicating with a machine and not a hidden Chinese speaker.
But what makes a human mind more "understanding"? Who says we're not simulating? Who says our mind even exists, in this space?
We're also a neural network, are we any more clever than a simulated one?
The paper also provides some suggestions as to where cog sci needs to go to make AI possible.
From my viewpoint, if you really think that LLMs can model cognition, then you are also going to have to bring along a model of human cognition to compare it to, and you have to do it "under the hood" as it were. The external behavior is not enough. In my formulation, if a space alien showed up with vastly different biology but appeared to be cognitively conscious, we may or may not want to believe in its cognitive ability, but it's just whattaboutism to use this hypothetical alien to argue for consciousness of the LLM.
1. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/c...
If you view understanding as knowledge + the ability to apply it, everything falls into its place. The Chinese room can't apply the knowledge that it has, even theoretically.
The people running the experiment.
And yes is the answer to what should be a rhetorical question.
1. Current ai models people use may be called neural networks, but they bare almost no real semblance to biological ones.
2. A complete human brain is not a compilation of all text books and internet chats. It is a nuanced technology shaped by human experiences , lived and biased by the chemistry of the human body. Human thought is not always linguistic. In the same way you do not tell your lungs to breathe every breath you can find a work of art astoundingly beautiful or a landscape to inspire you. Cleverness is one axis out of a billion to meter consciousness.
3. The human mind or consciousness stirs a lot of philosophical debate. Probably best not touched with a 10 ft poll on the Internet with strangers. I would encourage you to think about or read about human experiences, the synchronicities, and coincidences that happen between people. Especially under times of uncertainty, or blissful innovation. AI is seated backwards in the hierarchy of consciousness. That doesn't mean it's not useful but it's like comparing a water purification plant to the planets treatment of water from rain to subsurface flows and atmospheric chemistry.
Peace
I read the original chapters online but appreciate this format.
- LuaTeX-1.17.0
- LaTeX via pandoc
Kyle has spent a lot of time and resources trying to talk to OFCOM. They won't give answers, so the only reasonable option is to block the UK.
Which is the entire point of your laws. Blame yourself.