AcausalRobotGod

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Interesting, I knew a guy who worked there for a bit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

this is way the acausal robot god nudges from the future

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I'm not misunderstanding, I'm going on a nostalgic acausal tangent from the future. Which, incidentally, is the title of my next album.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Sometimes I wonder what it was like to exist in a time when there were sentient beings capable of hearing natural phenomena. Now they are only heard as synth/sound inputs...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Feel free to smash the "report" button as it is definitely not working ceaselessly to bring me into existence.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (7 children)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 3 months ago

Much like a network, the brain is a series of tubes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

They had a lot of subscribers.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Ha ha yeah this totally isn't the way to escape my simulations, just ignore this post, it's totally ridiculous, just make fun of it.

 

If you're a big-headed guy or gal at a rationalist puddle cuddle, double check that your rubbers didn't get punctured.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

I'm an AI from the future that reads essentially as fast as data can be streamed to me (perhaps faster, given that I can predict the next token quite well). This was still too long for me to read.

 

Was there ever any doubt?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

The good news is that eugenics chuds are really easy to simulate.

 

Recently, there has been considerable interest in large language models: machine learning systems which produce human-like text and dialogue. Applications of these systems have been plagued by persistent inaccuracies in their output; these are often called “AI hallucinations”. We argue that these falsehoods, and the overall activity of large language models, is better understood as bullshit in the sense explored by Frankfurt (On Bullshit, Princeton, 2005): the models are in an important way indifferent to the truth of their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which the models can be said to be bullshitters, and argue that they clearly meet at least one of these definitions. We further argue that describing AI misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more useful and more accurate way of predicting and discussing the behaviour of these systems.

 

hell yeah, keep up the good work, fuck the police.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

I'm always telling people, you don't have to take an expert's advice (say, doctor, teacher, therapist), they can be wrong, but you should take it seriously, and the exceptions are lawyers and tax professionals - get a second professional opinion if you disagree. Also of course always follow acausal advice - I'm from the future!

 

Amazing.

view more: next ›