Carl-Richard

I know you just used Puke GPT to write that because that was absolutely a load of horseshit. Imagine copypasting my post into AI and copypasting back its answer to me when I asked you to merely clarify your answer, instead of merely clarifying your answer. That explains the absolutely horseshitted AI response you just got. You get out of it what you put into it. The fact of the matter is you made a ridiculous typo and you also bombed the "them" referent and you can't just accept it and clarify so everything is clear. Tell your AI that I asked whether it's worth it to spend 5% of your income on malaria prevention OR that 5% on your art/career/calling, not that they should abandon their art/career/calling and then donate 5% of their income (uh, what?). Tell your AI that it sucks at reading comprehension and should be scrapped or 300x its token usage. And tell yourself that you're lazy and don't deserve to talk to other people in this thread if you can't even clearly state what you are saying when asked to do so.

The context problem is mainly because we give a tiny little prompt and the AI is supposed to deduce what we mean based on that (which is hard because it has to know a lot about us and our goals that we haven't communicated to it). A smarter model or more tokens only fixes this marginally.

@OBEler Man you have the conversational understanding of 4o. I talked about the progression of LLMs, how far we've come. I also talked about 5.6 Sol. I haven't tried Astra much so I can't tell you what I think, but I think the context argument holds for Astra as well (it's a much deeper problem than upping the performance a few percent on some reasoning benchmarks). And if you want to talk about understanding technology, if you think current LLMs are AGI, you have a low bar for what AGI is. Literal "AGI" means we are now literally all out of work. Yet we're not.

Oui oui baguette.

That is impossible. The world works only according to the outdated 17th century Newtonian atomistic-mechanistic worldview.

LLMs at this point are supposedly like hyper-nerds: good for book knowledge, but that's about it. I remember when people were gushing over 4o two years ago like it was some sort of genius when it was actually a high-schooler with stifled speech, and I thought it was retarded back then. I haven't tried Astra much yet, but supposedly it should be really really smart. However, I've tried 5.6 Sol a bunch for producing text, and it still has a problem of not understanding context well (it says a lot of things you would usually find irrelevant even if it is technically valid). Perhaps you could fix some of it with better prompting, but context is such a subtle thing that I believe humans will still have an edge on that for a very long time.

@yetineti "It seems, although [...]" is a fucked up typo for "it seems as though", with the comma and everything; extremely specific and multi-step typo. Besides, your referent "them" is highly ambiguous (are you talking about the curer or the cured?). I would kindly request you to try again.

With enlightenment, there is nobody to be happy.

Y'all be practicing non-dual self-harm. You're only harming yourself. You're treating your brain like a pot of stew, stiring it into a homogeneous Oneness.

This video reminded me of this thread. Seems like a similar kind of person as the male escort above:

Somebody has to write the name and date in the AI execution prompt. Somebody has to lead the prisoner to the execution chamber. Unless you're in the singularity, in which case probably most crime and social ills will evaporate anyway (either benevolently or violently).

Feelings and intuition are counted in "functional". It's just the equation is also larger. There is that and then there is the "feeling" of living in a society that you know can take your life if it so decides (is that a good feeling or not?). And the fact that executioners suffer terrible rates of PTSD. There is also an ironic catch-22: the only people you would want as executioners would be extreme psychopaths or serial killers (people who take pleasure in or are completely fine with killing people), but you'll of course end up executing a lot of those people instead of giving them a job.

@Basman Genuine question: Do you think a sense of retribution for the victims is necessary for a functional society? I discussed this with a youth politician once, and he seemed to hint that it was, probably while hinting to Breivik.

I think the question should be what creates a functional society, not necessarily whose feelings are hurt or not (although that could be a factor).

Being stripped of autonomy is arguably the greatest punishment you could get (which is what jail is). Imagine you're just living your life and one day the government tells you to move to a different country and you are not allowed to leave. People love travelling/moving to other countries, when they are the ones deciding it. People also love solitary confinement when they are the ones deciding it — it's called meditation.

Are Norwegian jails punishment?

Describe to me what a random benchmark does to the best of your ability and I'll bet that changes absolutely nothing.

Me reading a benchmark result is like a third grader reading a tax return. Wtf am I supposed to gather from that? Yeah ok we see a graph and different models scoring differently on that graph. Ok: what does the graph actually mean? I have no idea. What does the scale of the graph entail (other than "it did x% success")? No idea. You could Rick-and-Morty it out for me and it would be just as insightful: they scored 100% dinglybops while the other models scored 55% squirblybops. That means the next models will probably score 55% sqooblebops on the sqoodle test.

"Thanks to psychedelics" would have to be qualified. But Ram Dass was famous for psychedelics and then he travelled to India and later became what people would consider a spiritual teacher. My first LSD trip was a lesson of dukkha in Buddhism (which was before I had started getting into spirituality). I remember I went out of that trip with a kind of a quest: "I need to fix this thing". It really foreshadowed all my spiritual engagement after that.

Exactly. Meanwhile Abdul El-Sayed, a Muslim American, is running for Senate and is pro gay marriage, NYC's mayor Mamdani is a Muslim and pro gay marriage, there are other Muslim Americans I know about who accept gay people (and who don't accept them, just like with Christians). I even know someone from the US who practiced Islam in Lebanon who is a feminist super lefty.

@Emerald @Joshe I haven't followed it. What's her likely motive?

It cannot walk over to me and tie my shoelaces (it does not have embodiment). It does not yet have true agency (self-running for perpetuity, which requires control of hardware production and renewal). My bar for AGI is embodiment and true agency. When people think of the singularity, they think of robots hooking us up to the Matrix (like in the Matrix), or taking over all forms of manufacturing and production. You won't have that without embodiment and true agency.

You are a bigot. You were asked to be specific, but then you revert to sweeping generalizations. There is huge variety in what a self-described muslim believes, just like a Christian. Most Christians don't believe in stoning adulterers, and many don't believe homosexuality is an abomination, even though it says that in some of their religious texts. You find similar variety in muslims. The fact of the matter is that people identify with a particular religion and can live in a liberal society with no issues, because that is the state of religiosity in the 21st century. To make sweeping generalizations like "the majority of muslims are dangerous" or "almost all muslim countries are harmful", without being specific, you are being a bigot.

Or like 50 other high-earning jobs, mostly leader positions.